Mondays don't trouble me on their stereotyped merits or lack thereof. The week has to start somewhere, might as well be Monday.
This one was a real kick in the metaphorical teeth.
Monday is trash & recyclables day, so as I was heading out, I intended to roll both cans back down the driveway if they'd been emptied. The large, blue recyclables cart was done, so I wheeled and parked it. The gray trash can...
...was gone.
Not lying nearby, not knocked up or down the cross street. Just -- gone. After calling Val to assure that she hadn't hidden it, I called APD. They dutifully took a theft report, which was nice, since I wasn't even certain this would be a reportable theft. The cans, after all, belong to the city. But, yes, it is considered theft -- of the can, anyway. I don't think the trash, if still inside, would count.
Then I called Austin's Solid Waste Works and told them my sad tale. The rep replied that, sometimes, the automated lifter arm drops the entire can into the collection truck, and when that does happen, that's the ballgame. The compressors take care of the evidence, and it is far too risky for the truck men to jump in after one. This was news to me, that sometimes an entire can goes away; shoot, I'd pay to see that. Anyway, we should get a new can next Monday.
Val then lost her cell phone, and though it was recovered at the store she'd dropped it and I retrieved it later that evening, the display unit had been cracked and it is essentially non-functional. So, eBay will provide a new one, and then that will go to the Verizon Wireless store for cultural reprogramming. Feh, a nuisance.
Finally, it was indeed Armageddon at Val's place of work, which was no surprise. It was, typically, done in a ham-handed manner. A big hint was the large order for moving boxes placed last week, for people to clean out their desks and cubes into. Victims got their vacation balances cashed out, with direct deposits being made either on Friday or Saturday, so anyone paying attention knew what was coming. And, worse, those laid off got NO severance, regardless of length of service. NONE! ZERO! Damn, that is really cold, and indicative of (a) the company's financial outlook and (b) the sort of people who currently are in charge. The place is circling the drain; it might pull out of the death spiral, but right now it's anyone's guess. I suppose we'll know sometime in the next 90 days if today's bloodletting made any difference.
To be clear, Val did NOT get the axe. Which for now is a good thing; but she's pretty stressed over how many good people did get whacked. Layoffs are never a nice thing, but they are very much a current reality.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Monday, February 02, 2009
Nino Bongiovanni
There is always, at all times, an oldest ex-major league baseball player. The title is a bit like the king or queen of England -- it passes immediately upon the death of the incumbent. It's not a great distinction to hold, because no one ever keeps it for very long, but it's there, and someone fulfills the office. And then that man passes, and so does the title -- I haven't researched this, but it seems like there's a new Oldest Ex-Major Leaguer about three times every two years. The senior retiree is always a nonagenarian (at least), which is why the title moves frequently, and when he does pass on he gets a press release, and usually the new guy gets some press coverage as well.
The most recent was Billy Werber, who passed away on January 22, age 100. Werber also had a long profile last year when he became the oldest ex, thanks to his being the last teammate of Babe Ruth. Werber could tell plenty of Ruth stories, and even today that makes for good copy.
The oldest ex-major league player always gets a little media spotlight, even if it is for the dismal reason of dying. The not-quite-oldest ones leave us in much more obscure circumstances.
Anthony "Nino" Bongiovanni was, best I can determine, the fifth-oldest former major league baseball player when he passed away on January 6, 2009, age 97. I didn't learn about his death for nearly a month, and even then had to Google-dig to find a single obituary in the San Jose Mercury News, the local paper. Nino had lived in the south San Francisco Bay area for decades, if I recall.
Sure, I love baseball, but why this much involvement with an olde-tyme player who, while good, was not great, not more than a line or two in the long history of baseball lore?
I was working a job back in the late 1990s, and one co-worker, Pat, loved to talk baseball at times. It turned out he had played in college, and that's where he'd met his wife, Linda, who also worked elsewhere in the building. Linda was Nino's daughter. I was downright tickled, working alongside family of a former ballplayer. Pat and I each traveled a lot in those jobs, and one time both needed to go to San Jose. I asked if he could arrange a dinner out with Nino, he did, and we spent several hours at an Olive Garden eating spaghetti and talking baseball. Nino was well into his 80s then, but still plenty spry. He told stories about his days in the game, his one at-bat in the 1939 World Series, opinions on modern day baseball (he wasn't kind in his view of Barry Bonds). He showed me, and let me try on, his 1939 National League Champions ring, and told how he had gotten it years after the fact thanks to some coverage in Sports Illustrated. And, though he's not mentioned in it, I asked if he would autograph a copy of Ritter's The Glory Of Their Times -- it seemed an appropriate choice. The evening was a delight, one I remember fondly.
I would have loved to have met him again, but never did. One time left a brilliant memory.
My condolences to Linda, Pat, and their entire family, and my thanks to the memory of Nino, who played the great game, and was a fine dinner companion.
Nino Bongiovanni, Cincinnati Reds 1938-39.
The most recent was Billy Werber, who passed away on January 22, age 100. Werber also had a long profile last year when he became the oldest ex, thanks to his being the last teammate of Babe Ruth. Werber could tell plenty of Ruth stories, and even today that makes for good copy.
The oldest ex-major league player always gets a little media spotlight, even if it is for the dismal reason of dying. The not-quite-oldest ones leave us in much more obscure circumstances.
Anthony "Nino" Bongiovanni was, best I can determine, the fifth-oldest former major league baseball player when he passed away on January 6, 2009, age 97. I didn't learn about his death for nearly a month, and even then had to Google-dig to find a single obituary in the San Jose Mercury News, the local paper. Nino had lived in the south San Francisco Bay area for decades, if I recall.
Sure, I love baseball, but why this much involvement with an olde-tyme player who, while good, was not great, not more than a line or two in the long history of baseball lore?
I was working a job back in the late 1990s, and one co-worker, Pat, loved to talk baseball at times. It turned out he had played in college, and that's where he'd met his wife, Linda, who also worked elsewhere in the building. Linda was Nino's daughter. I was downright tickled, working alongside family of a former ballplayer. Pat and I each traveled a lot in those jobs, and one time both needed to go to San Jose. I asked if he could arrange a dinner out with Nino, he did, and we spent several hours at an Olive Garden eating spaghetti and talking baseball. Nino was well into his 80s then, but still plenty spry. He told stories about his days in the game, his one at-bat in the 1939 World Series, opinions on modern day baseball (he wasn't kind in his view of Barry Bonds). He showed me, and let me try on, his 1939 National League Champions ring, and told how he had gotten it years after the fact thanks to some coverage in Sports Illustrated. And, though he's not mentioned in it, I asked if he would autograph a copy of Ritter's The Glory Of Their Times -- it seemed an appropriate choice. The evening was a delight, one I remember fondly.
I would have loved to have met him again, but never did. One time left a brilliant memory.
My condolences to Linda, Pat, and their entire family, and my thanks to the memory of Nino, who played the great game, and was a fine dinner companion.
Nino Bongiovanni, Cincinnati Reds 1938-39.
Sunday, February 01, 2009
Seventh Birthday
Amalie turned seven a few days ago. It almost seems like she has a birthday every year!
It was a regular school day, but she brightened her classmates' day by providing the makings for throw pillows, a technique she learned in Girl Scouts. Amie picked out swatches of felt, took them to school to let her fellow students pick their favorites, and brought everything home, labeled. Val then spent a long night cutting the swatch edges into strips so they could be tied together. Finally, everything went back to class, and the kids tied and stuffed their pillows. It was quite a lot of work, but everyone enjoyed it.
Val, still on furlough, picked Amie up on her birthday and took her and Carson to a park -- I was still retrieving her new bicycle from where we'd hidden it (at a friend's house). I got home, parked the bike on the back deck, and then scattered Amie's other gifts around the house. Unlike past years, where they were just lying about in plain sight, Val and I thought she was now old enough for a real scavenger hunt. So I wrote up a bunch of clues -- easy to figure out, but she had to do the reading and the reasoning -- including one very easy word puzzle. Amalie loved this approach, and picked up on it quickly -- get a clue, read it, solve it, and then dash away through the house, Carson at her heels to join in the fun. (And she wasn't allowed to collect a present until she had solved its clue, even if she spotted it early.)
Sherlock Amalie, world's greatest kid detective, solves a clue.
Amie had quickly, and enthusiastically, gathered her presents and was ready for the last clue. It led her to the back deck, where she quickly spotted and grabbed a wrapped gift -- obviously a DVD movie -- which was sitting on the seat of the new bike. Holding her treasure aloft, she did a little dance, oblivious to the bike, until Carson mentioned it to her. The penny dropped, along with her jaw, as she took in her biggest present and the one she incredibly had missed.
Oh yeah -- a bike!
The hoard gathered, the unwrapping commenced, always a joyful orgy of chaos and rending. Carson knows his birthday is but weeks away, but it's hard for a sibling to only watch from the sidelines, and Amalie graciously let him open three presents, which he attacked with gusto.
Some arts & crafts things, a painting kit, a PixOs set she had wanted since before Christmas, a Girl Scouts shirt, some books, a movie, new soccer socks and shinguards, and a Barbie, among other things. Amalie was plentifully satisfied.
Presents!
And then it was on to the cake. I had baked Amie's hand-picked selection the night before, but it needed frosting. We mixed up a batch, and I began icing the cake per Amie's long-planned specifications -- white on the sides, sky blue over the top. Both children got enough samples that a second, small batch had to be mixed before the cake was finished, but we got there. Amie had also wanted a rainbow on the cake, and despite my assurances that it would happen, she was getting worried -- there was no more frosting! I pulled out my secret ace -- a six-color pack of nonpareils, little dot sprinkles. Unfortunately, the first test spot showed they didn't stick to the frosting worth a damn; fortunately, Val hit on a solution immediately. We pulled out a sheet of wax paper and cut out an arc. Using this as a template, I was able to get the nonpareils to more or less stay in place, and the rainbow was formed -- red, orange, yellow, green, purple, and pink on top, since it was Amalie's cake, after all. It turned out rather nice.
Birthday rainbow.
Dinner followed, and then the traditional songmaking and blowing out of the candles, a job for which Amie's lungs are well-suited. We each had a piece of cake, and the kids then demolished it with small seconds and thirds and samplings of frosting. It didn't look very nice after that, but still tasted great.
Amalie pointed out she had a loose tooth, which fell out on Sunday, February 1st.
It was a regular school day, but she brightened her classmates' day by providing the makings for throw pillows, a technique she learned in Girl Scouts. Amie picked out swatches of felt, took them to school to let her fellow students pick their favorites, and brought everything home, labeled. Val then spent a long night cutting the swatch edges into strips so they could be tied together. Finally, everything went back to class, and the kids tied and stuffed their pillows. It was quite a lot of work, but everyone enjoyed it.
Val, still on furlough, picked Amie up on her birthday and took her and Carson to a park -- I was still retrieving her new bicycle from where we'd hidden it (at a friend's house). I got home, parked the bike on the back deck, and then scattered Amie's other gifts around the house. Unlike past years, where they were just lying about in plain sight, Val and I thought she was now old enough for a real scavenger hunt. So I wrote up a bunch of clues -- easy to figure out, but she had to do the reading and the reasoning -- including one very easy word puzzle. Amalie loved this approach, and picked up on it quickly -- get a clue, read it, solve it, and then dash away through the house, Carson at her heels to join in the fun. (And she wasn't allowed to collect a present until she had solved its clue, even if she spotted it early.)
Sherlock Amalie, world's greatest kid detective, solves a clue.Amie had quickly, and enthusiastically, gathered her presents and was ready for the last clue. It led her to the back deck, where she quickly spotted and grabbed a wrapped gift -- obviously a DVD movie -- which was sitting on the seat of the new bike. Holding her treasure aloft, she did a little dance, oblivious to the bike, until Carson mentioned it to her. The penny dropped, along with her jaw, as she took in her biggest present and the one she incredibly had missed.
Oh yeah -- a bike!The hoard gathered, the unwrapping commenced, always a joyful orgy of chaos and rending. Carson knows his birthday is but weeks away, but it's hard for a sibling to only watch from the sidelines, and Amalie graciously let him open three presents, which he attacked with gusto.
Some arts & crafts things, a painting kit, a PixOs set she had wanted since before Christmas, a Girl Scouts shirt, some books, a movie, new soccer socks and shinguards, and a Barbie, among other things. Amalie was plentifully satisfied.
Presents!And then it was on to the cake. I had baked Amie's hand-picked selection the night before, but it needed frosting. We mixed up a batch, and I began icing the cake per Amie's long-planned specifications -- white on the sides, sky blue over the top. Both children got enough samples that a second, small batch had to be mixed before the cake was finished, but we got there. Amie had also wanted a rainbow on the cake, and despite my assurances that it would happen, she was getting worried -- there was no more frosting! I pulled out my secret ace -- a six-color pack of nonpareils, little dot sprinkles. Unfortunately, the first test spot showed they didn't stick to the frosting worth a damn; fortunately, Val hit on a solution immediately. We pulled out a sheet of wax paper and cut out an arc. Using this as a template, I was able to get the nonpareils to more or less stay in place, and the rainbow was formed -- red, orange, yellow, green, purple, and pink on top, since it was Amalie's cake, after all. It turned out rather nice.
Birthday rainbow.Dinner followed, and then the traditional songmaking and blowing out of the candles, a job for which Amie's lungs are well-suited. We each had a piece of cake, and the kids then demolished it with small seconds and thirds and samplings of frosting. It didn't look very nice after that, but still tasted great.
Amalie pointed out she had a loose tooth, which fell out on Sunday, February 1st.
Astros Winter Caravan
Most offseasons, the Houston Astros have a Winter Caravan -- round up a couple of players, travel around to a few cities in Texas and Louisiana and maybe a bit further, and give a little face time back to the fans outside of the home city. I've been to a few over the years, and they are low-key affairs, not too crowded, little media coverage. The fans and players all know everyone is there for some autographs and pictures, and at least in Austin, I've never seen one get unruly. So everyone has a good time.
This year's Austin visit was on January 27. When I first checked the Caravan schedule back in December, only one stop was listed, at a sporting goods store at the north end of town -- not ideal, but manageable for me. Happily, while re-checking a few nights prior to the date, a second stop was listed -- at the University Of Texas football stadium, much closer, and earlier in the afternoon. Excellent! Also listed were the visiting players -- infielder Mark Saccomanno, pitcher / rehab patient Mike Hampton, and retired slugger Jeff Bagwell, who now works for the front office.
Wow. The Caravan delivers some good players, but rarely one of Bagwell's stature.
I asked Carson is he wanted to meet some baseball players, and he agreed. I unearthed some cards of Bagwell and Hampton, made sure I knew where to park, and we were ready.
Tuesday was cold and windy, but the walk from the garage to the stadium wasn't too far, and soon we were inside the north foyer and warm again. I've never attended a game here and only ever been in the executive club, thanks to a former co-worker who had a membership and enjoyed having lunch there sometimes (it did serve up a good board of fare). Here we were, in a large lobby, not the most welcoming environment but not bad. There were concession stands and several chairs with tables or benches, utilitarian, probably a popular lunchtime stop for the student body. Carson and I took our place at the end of the line, which continued growing behind us.
Carson quickly took note of the many baseball bats other fans had brought in hopes of autographs. I explained that people like getting all sorts of things signed -- I had brought only cards (my preferred memorabilia, as they take up little space), but others had bats, balls (lots of baseballs), photographs, or posters. The man behind us had a huge Bagwell photo, about 20" x 24" at a guess, which was in a protective sleeve -- he showed it to Carson, and told me he'd bought it in Houston the week before for $15 (not a bad deal). While we waited for the players to arrive, Carson wandered about, trying to have some fun or talking to other fans in line. At one point a baby, a crawler, started heading across the open floor -- Carson marched out and recommended that the baby head back to his daddy. The littler one giggled, and eventually turned around. The waiting was rather dull (always is), but the crowd was in good spirits.
Finally the players arrived and the line started poking along. Carson was getting even more restless, but also tired and a little hungry. We reached the short rope maze at the head of the line, which was moving smoothly. I wasn't listening in deliberately, but I overheard a young woman a little bit behind us make a mild lament that she'd just today learned about the Caravan. She gave enough clues that I guessed she was wanting a picture but didn't have a camera. I caught her attention and asked if she wanted a picture with Bagwell? Yes, she replied, but she didn't have a camera. "But I do -- do you have email?" I responded, and said I'd take her pic and send it to her. This pleased her, but neither of us had any scrap paper. I remembered there were copies of the UT daily newspaper back by the door, and since Carson needed something to do, I described to him where to go to get one. He found it on the second try, the woman wrote down her email addy, and we were at the head of the line.
Bagwell was the first along the table. I handed one card to Carson and said he should pass it to Mr. Bagwell. To my shock, he skim-tossed it across the table into Bagwell's lap! Thankfully, Bags is an old pro at this, picked it up with a smile and signed it, then signed mine as well. I told Carson to step behind the table for a quick picture, and he did, but well to the side. Jeff coaxed him close with a "c'mere, bud!" and I got my shot in.
Past and future Red Sox draft picks (Jeff, 1989, fourth round, and Carson, 2023, first round).
We thanked Bagwell and moved to the next player, Mark Saccomanno. I didn't have any cards of him, but the Astros prepare all their player reps with their own postcards, so we took one and thanked him and Carson shook his hand. Mike Hampton was the last player, and Carson and I both handed him our own baseball cards. Hampton has been bedeviled by injuries for the last few seasons, missing 2006 and 2007 completely. It's good to see him back on the mound at last, and I told him so, that no one should have to live under such a bad sign. He thanked me for the sentiment, and apparently he's been hearing that a lot. We thanked him as well.
Last along the table was longtime Astros announcer Milo Hamilton, quietly signing his own postcards. I enjoy hearing Hamilton's voice, a good baseball voice, and told him so. Looking back, I saw the woman, Lisa, had reached Bagwell's station, so I told Carson to stay right here and I'll be right back. I walked back, took two shots, and that was that. Walking back, Milo had gathered Carson to his side protectively, and said that Carson had been a very good boy.
Milo Hamilton, good with kids.
We needed a restroom break, and then Carson wanted a corn dog. Unfortunately, the concession stands didn't have corn dogs, but he did get a free cinnamon pretzel, which kept him busy on the walk back to the car. I could see he was tired; it had been about two hours since we left home, and most of that was spent waiting around. On the way out of the parking garage, the car at the head of the line (about a dozen cars long) was clearly totally confused about how to get out of the gate, so I turned aside and drove all the way down to the bottom level where there was an open exit, and we were out.
Carson nibbled his pretzel and started to doze off. I was tempted to do the same -- well, go directly home and sack out -- but had promised to get milk cartons for Amalie's school party the next day and wouldn't have a better opportunity. It would have been so easy to go home (it turns out I was getting a cold, which is why I was overwhelmingly tired), but no, gotta be responsible.
We arrived at the Costco, Carson completely zonked. I got a carriage, wrapped him in a blanket, and stuffed some gloves under his head as a makeshift pillow. In we went, got our few things, and back out. As I was lying him in the backseat, he briefly awoke, and said "that was fast!"
"Yes, you slept through it. Go back to sleep." He did, all the way home. Later, I sent Lisa her pictures.
This year's Austin visit was on January 27. When I first checked the Caravan schedule back in December, only one stop was listed, at a sporting goods store at the north end of town -- not ideal, but manageable for me. Happily, while re-checking a few nights prior to the date, a second stop was listed -- at the University Of Texas football stadium, much closer, and earlier in the afternoon. Excellent! Also listed were the visiting players -- infielder Mark Saccomanno, pitcher / rehab patient Mike Hampton, and retired slugger Jeff Bagwell, who now works for the front office.
Wow. The Caravan delivers some good players, but rarely one of Bagwell's stature.
I asked Carson is he wanted to meet some baseball players, and he agreed. I unearthed some cards of Bagwell and Hampton, made sure I knew where to park, and we were ready.
Tuesday was cold and windy, but the walk from the garage to the stadium wasn't too far, and soon we were inside the north foyer and warm again. I've never attended a game here and only ever been in the executive club, thanks to a former co-worker who had a membership and enjoyed having lunch there sometimes (it did serve up a good board of fare). Here we were, in a large lobby, not the most welcoming environment but not bad. There were concession stands and several chairs with tables or benches, utilitarian, probably a popular lunchtime stop for the student body. Carson and I took our place at the end of the line, which continued growing behind us.
Carson quickly took note of the many baseball bats other fans had brought in hopes of autographs. I explained that people like getting all sorts of things signed -- I had brought only cards (my preferred memorabilia, as they take up little space), but others had bats, balls (lots of baseballs), photographs, or posters. The man behind us had a huge Bagwell photo, about 20" x 24" at a guess, which was in a protective sleeve -- he showed it to Carson, and told me he'd bought it in Houston the week before for $15 (not a bad deal). While we waited for the players to arrive, Carson wandered about, trying to have some fun or talking to other fans in line. At one point a baby, a crawler, started heading across the open floor -- Carson marched out and recommended that the baby head back to his daddy. The littler one giggled, and eventually turned around. The waiting was rather dull (always is), but the crowd was in good spirits.
Finally the players arrived and the line started poking along. Carson was getting even more restless, but also tired and a little hungry. We reached the short rope maze at the head of the line, which was moving smoothly. I wasn't listening in deliberately, but I overheard a young woman a little bit behind us make a mild lament that she'd just today learned about the Caravan. She gave enough clues that I guessed she was wanting a picture but didn't have a camera. I caught her attention and asked if she wanted a picture with Bagwell? Yes, she replied, but she didn't have a camera. "But I do -- do you have email?" I responded, and said I'd take her pic and send it to her. This pleased her, but neither of us had any scrap paper. I remembered there were copies of the UT daily newspaper back by the door, and since Carson needed something to do, I described to him where to go to get one. He found it on the second try, the woman wrote down her email addy, and we were at the head of the line.
Bagwell was the first along the table. I handed one card to Carson and said he should pass it to Mr. Bagwell. To my shock, he skim-tossed it across the table into Bagwell's lap! Thankfully, Bags is an old pro at this, picked it up with a smile and signed it, then signed mine as well. I told Carson to step behind the table for a quick picture, and he did, but well to the side. Jeff coaxed him close with a "c'mere, bud!" and I got my shot in.
Past and future Red Sox draft picks (Jeff, 1989, fourth round, and Carson, 2023, first round).We thanked Bagwell and moved to the next player, Mark Saccomanno. I didn't have any cards of him, but the Astros prepare all their player reps with their own postcards, so we took one and thanked him and Carson shook his hand. Mike Hampton was the last player, and Carson and I both handed him our own baseball cards. Hampton has been bedeviled by injuries for the last few seasons, missing 2006 and 2007 completely. It's good to see him back on the mound at last, and I told him so, that no one should have to live under such a bad sign. He thanked me for the sentiment, and apparently he's been hearing that a lot. We thanked him as well.
Last along the table was longtime Astros announcer Milo Hamilton, quietly signing his own postcards. I enjoy hearing Hamilton's voice, a good baseball voice, and told him so. Looking back, I saw the woman, Lisa, had reached Bagwell's station, so I told Carson to stay right here and I'll be right back. I walked back, took two shots, and that was that. Walking back, Milo had gathered Carson to his side protectively, and said that Carson had been a very good boy.
Milo Hamilton, good with kids.We needed a restroom break, and then Carson wanted a corn dog. Unfortunately, the concession stands didn't have corn dogs, but he did get a free cinnamon pretzel, which kept him busy on the walk back to the car. I could see he was tired; it had been about two hours since we left home, and most of that was spent waiting around. On the way out of the parking garage, the car at the head of the line (about a dozen cars long) was clearly totally confused about how to get out of the gate, so I turned aside and drove all the way down to the bottom level where there was an open exit, and we were out.
Carson nibbled his pretzel and started to doze off. I was tempted to do the same -- well, go directly home and sack out -- but had promised to get milk cartons for Amalie's school party the next day and wouldn't have a better opportunity. It would have been so easy to go home (it turns out I was getting a cold, which is why I was overwhelmingly tired), but no, gotta be responsible.
We arrived at the Costco, Carson completely zonked. I got a carriage, wrapped him in a blanket, and stuffed some gloves under his head as a makeshift pillow. In we went, got our few things, and back out. As I was lying him in the backseat, he briefly awoke, and said "that was fast!"
"Yes, you slept through it. Go back to sleep." He did, all the way home. Later, I sent Lisa her pictures.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
At last
Goodbye, President George Walker Bush. I am not going to miss you at all.
Welcome, President Barack Hussein Obama. I voted for you, and proudly. Your taking the office today, and winning the election back in November, validates so many of the myths I and many were told about America as we were growing up, promises that have at last, in part, been fulfilled.
You have four years -- I'll help work to make it eight -- to fulfill more of those promises. I so look forward to this time, for me, and more for my children. Take the lead.
Welcome, President Barack Hussein Obama. I voted for you, and proudly. Your taking the office today, and winning the election back in November, validates so many of the myths I and many were told about America as we were growing up, promises that have at last, in part, been fulfilled.
You have four years -- I'll help work to make it eight -- to fulfill more of those promises. I so look forward to this time, for me, and more for my children. Take the lead.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
The Hall's 2009 Writers Ballot -- Results
The Baseball Hall Of Fame announced the results of the writers' ballot on 12-January, so let's take a look and wrap it up for another year.
Congratulations to newest Hall members Rickey Henderson and Jim Rice.
2009 HOF Voting results (539 ballots returned)
...candidate.......... votes.. %
--- ELECTED ---
1. Rickey Henderson... 511.. 94.8%
2. Jim Rice........... 412.. 76.4%
--- not elected ---
3. Andre Dawson....... 361.. 67.0%
4. Bert Blyleven...... 338.. 62.7%
5. Lee Smith.......... 240.. 44.5%
6. Jack Morris........ 237.. 44.0%
7. Tommy John......... 171.. 31.7%
8. Tim Raines......... 122.. 22.6%
9. Mark McGwire....... 118.. 21.9%
10. Alan Trammell...... 94.. 17.4%
11. Dave Parker........ 81.. 15.0%
12. Don Mattingly...... 64.. 11.9%
13. Dale Murphy........ 62.. 11.5%
14. Harold Baines...... 32... 5.9%
--- relegated ---
15. Mark Grace......... 22... 4.1%
16. David Cone......... 21... 3.9%
17. Matt Williams....... 7... 1.3%
18. Mo Vaughn........... 6... 1.1%
19. Jay Bell............ 2... 0.4%
20. Jesse Orosco........ 1... 0.2%
21t. Ron Gant........... 0... 0.0%
21t. Dan Plesac......... 0... 0.0%
21t. Greg Vaughn........ 0... 0.0%
Candidates I supported: Blyleven, Henderson, McGwire, Murphy, Raines, Rice.
Two were elected, can't complain, and Blyleven is still in good position though down to onlyfour three more ballot cycles. Still hoping.
Candidates I thought would be elected: Dawson, Henderson, Rice.
This wasn't much by way of prognostication. Dawson fell short, but was the top vote-getter among unelected candidates, and is probably in line for 2010 or 2011 election.
Candidates I thought would be relegated: Bell, Gant, Plesac, Greg Vaughn.
Again, not a difficult guess, but I picked only four of the nine. The complete shutouts didn't surprise me, but I thought the other five would get a good bit more interest. Not so.
Turning to individual candidates, the vote differentials from 2008 were so small I won't bother with percentages.
Henderson was inevitable.
Rice (+20 votes) finally limped over the finish line. There's lesser players in the Hall.
Dawson (+3) and Blyleven (+2) basically stayed in place. I'm still confident both will be elected, but Bert's clock is running short.
Smith (+5) saw the biggest jump among players not on their final ballot. In the same low-40% zone with Morris (+4), it doesn't look promising. If neither leaps past 50% next year, they're doomed. Morris being doomed doesn't bother me. Smith... tougher call. I'm not behind his candidacy yet.
John (+13 on his final ballot) finally has run out of time. No tears here.
Raines (-10) and McGwire (-10) both lost votes, which never makes sense to me. The electorate changes a bit every year, sure, and it's not unusual when opinions turn to the positive (witness Rice), but to the negative? Weird. I wish I understood it better, but getting logical rationales from the BBWAA members is an elusive task. With McGwire, any voter can simply play the "steroids!" card (at least in his own head, if not on paper -- there's no accountability), but Raines? Here's hoping this was a "Rickey First" reaction and his candidacy gets on the move next year, because this man is eminently overqualified for the honor of the Hall.
The McGwire grudge clearly runs very, very deep amongst the voters. The only chances Mac's candidacy has, and these are not at all good chances, are (a) the forthcoming (2011) ballot massacre of Rafael Palmeiro will finally slake the electorate with enough spillage of steroid-tainted blood, or (b) McGwire speaks, and does so clearly and unambiguously. Of course the only thing any writer wants to hear from him is some version of "I did it, and here's what I did" -- if he speaks denials no one will believe him, because they only want to hear what they want to hear. It's not a happy situation, and I understand why he has chosen to be silent.
Trammell (-5) has a better case than longtime teammate Morris, but perception and legend get in the way of things. Going nowhere, apparently. Keystone sack partner Lou Whitaker only lasted one ballot, so Tram is getting a lot more respect even if not enough.
Parker (-1) is in a holding pattern, counting down to his final ballot in a few years.
Mattingly (-22) took the biggest hit. I don't consider him Hall-worthy anyway -- few outside of Yankee fandom do -- but wow, that's a huge drop. Wonder if the new Rice voters all migrated en masse from Donnie to Jim Ed? Small fluctuations are just noise in the electorate, but this was pretty big. He's not going in anyway, but -22 without obvious reasons behind it is just confusing.
Murphy (-13) is now into the final third of his 15-year candidacy window, and going nowhere. Murf is one of the few universally acclaimed Good Guys in baseball history, and since he clearly is getting no credit for that, it puts the lie to the Hall's published guidelines of tasking its voters with considering sportsmanship, character, and integrity. Those are listed so the voters can use (perceived) lack of them to excuse not voting for a candidate (e.g., Albert Belle, just to throw out one name), but no one ever really uses them to support voting for a player. That's not how things should be, but is how things are. Murphy is just counting down, much like Parker.
Baines (+4) continues to hang on by knife-edge margins, though by clearing the 5% minimum by a whole six votes, he set a new personal high. It perplexes me that 32 voters, this year, considered Baines Hall worthy while 28 voters did not consider Henderson to be so. Those tiny blocs in the voting don't really mean much, but one does have to wonder what thought processes are being used to reach these conclusions.
Grace, Cone, Williams, both Vaughns, Bell, Gant, and Plesac were all ballot rookies, and got the "one and done" treatment. I have no worthwhile objections here.
And that leaves us with Jesse Orosco, another ballot first-timer. I don't feel bad for Orosco that he was bounced from the ballot, but I do feel let down for baseball. The BBWAA electorate has only recently come to hesitant terms with what a closer relief pitcher has to accomplish in order to be considered Hall measure. They haven't yet had that discussion about middle relievers. I am not at all ready to take a position on the matter, but Orosco represented one of the best opportunities to have that discussion with a live example, as he is one of the most accomplished middle relievers in baseball history. If he'd gotten just enough (Baines level) support to stay on the ballot, that discussion could have progressed -- but no, and now, if it is ever to be raised, will have to be raised on the shoulders of a less-accomplished pitcher. The Orosco chance is gone, and it may be a while before another MR reaches the ballot who could drive that discussion, sustain the dialogue, get the debate bubbling. Maybe MRs are not Hall worthy, but wouldn't it be better to kick the notion around for a while instead of accepting it by fiat? Sorry, Jesse, you could have held aloft a torch for a few years, but it was too quickly snuffed.
Added thought, whomever was the writer who did cast the one vote for Orosco, is someone whose hand I'd like to shake, and ask why he did cast that vote.
Headliner first-time probable candidates for 2010: Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, and Fred McGriff. Should be interesting.
Congratulations to newest Hall members Rickey Henderson and Jim Rice.
2009 HOF Voting results (539 ballots returned)
...candidate.......... votes.. %
--- ELECTED ---
1. Rickey Henderson... 511.. 94.8%
2. Jim Rice........... 412.. 76.4%
--- not elected ---
3. Andre Dawson....... 361.. 67.0%
4. Bert Blyleven...... 338.. 62.7%
5. Lee Smith.......... 240.. 44.5%
6. Jack Morris........ 237.. 44.0%
7. Tommy John......... 171.. 31.7%
8. Tim Raines......... 122.. 22.6%
9. Mark McGwire....... 118.. 21.9%
10. Alan Trammell...... 94.. 17.4%
11. Dave Parker........ 81.. 15.0%
12. Don Mattingly...... 64.. 11.9%
13. Dale Murphy........ 62.. 11.5%
14. Harold Baines...... 32... 5.9%
--- relegated ---
15. Mark Grace......... 22... 4.1%
16. David Cone......... 21... 3.9%
17. Matt Williams....... 7... 1.3%
18. Mo Vaughn........... 6... 1.1%
19. Jay Bell............ 2... 0.4%
20. Jesse Orosco........ 1... 0.2%
21t. Ron Gant........... 0... 0.0%
21t. Dan Plesac......... 0... 0.0%
21t. Greg Vaughn........ 0... 0.0%
Candidates I supported: Blyleven, Henderson, McGwire, Murphy, Raines, Rice.
Two were elected, can't complain, and Blyleven is still in good position though down to only
Candidates I thought would be elected: Dawson, Henderson, Rice.
This wasn't much by way of prognostication. Dawson fell short, but was the top vote-getter among unelected candidates, and is probably in line for 2010 or 2011 election.
Candidates I thought would be relegated: Bell, Gant, Plesac, Greg Vaughn.
Again, not a difficult guess, but I picked only four of the nine. The complete shutouts didn't surprise me, but I thought the other five would get a good bit more interest. Not so.
Turning to individual candidates, the vote differentials from 2008 were so small I won't bother with percentages.
Henderson was inevitable.
Rice (+20 votes) finally limped over the finish line. There's lesser players in the Hall.
Dawson (+3) and Blyleven (+2) basically stayed in place. I'm still confident both will be elected, but Bert's clock is running short.
Smith (+5) saw the biggest jump among players not on their final ballot. In the same low-40% zone with Morris (+4), it doesn't look promising. If neither leaps past 50% next year, they're doomed. Morris being doomed doesn't bother me. Smith... tougher call. I'm not behind his candidacy yet.
John (+13 on his final ballot) finally has run out of time. No tears here.
Raines (-10) and McGwire (-10) both lost votes, which never makes sense to me. The electorate changes a bit every year, sure, and it's not unusual when opinions turn to the positive (witness Rice), but to the negative? Weird. I wish I understood it better, but getting logical rationales from the BBWAA members is an elusive task. With McGwire, any voter can simply play the "steroids!" card (at least in his own head, if not on paper -- there's no accountability), but Raines? Here's hoping this was a "Rickey First" reaction and his candidacy gets on the move next year, because this man is eminently overqualified for the honor of the Hall.
The McGwire grudge clearly runs very, very deep amongst the voters. The only chances Mac's candidacy has, and these are not at all good chances, are (a) the forthcoming (2011) ballot massacre of Rafael Palmeiro will finally slake the electorate with enough spillage of steroid-tainted blood, or (b) McGwire speaks, and does so clearly and unambiguously. Of course the only thing any writer wants to hear from him is some version of "I did it, and here's what I did" -- if he speaks denials no one will believe him, because they only want to hear what they want to hear. It's not a happy situation, and I understand why he has chosen to be silent.
Trammell (-5) has a better case than longtime teammate Morris, but perception and legend get in the way of things. Going nowhere, apparently. Keystone sack partner Lou Whitaker only lasted one ballot, so Tram is getting a lot more respect even if not enough.
Parker (-1) is in a holding pattern, counting down to his final ballot in a few years.
Mattingly (-22) took the biggest hit. I don't consider him Hall-worthy anyway -- few outside of Yankee fandom do -- but wow, that's a huge drop. Wonder if the new Rice voters all migrated en masse from Donnie to Jim Ed? Small fluctuations are just noise in the electorate, but this was pretty big. He's not going in anyway, but -22 without obvious reasons behind it is just confusing.
Murphy (-13) is now into the final third of his 15-year candidacy window, and going nowhere. Murf is one of the few universally acclaimed Good Guys in baseball history, and since he clearly is getting no credit for that, it puts the lie to the Hall's published guidelines of tasking its voters with considering sportsmanship, character, and integrity. Those are listed so the voters can use (perceived) lack of them to excuse not voting for a candidate (e.g., Albert Belle, just to throw out one name), but no one ever really uses them to support voting for a player. That's not how things should be, but is how things are. Murphy is just counting down, much like Parker.
Baines (+4) continues to hang on by knife-edge margins, though by clearing the 5% minimum by a whole six votes, he set a new personal high. It perplexes me that 32 voters, this year, considered Baines Hall worthy while 28 voters did not consider Henderson to be so. Those tiny blocs in the voting don't really mean much, but one does have to wonder what thought processes are being used to reach these conclusions.
Grace, Cone, Williams, both Vaughns, Bell, Gant, and Plesac were all ballot rookies, and got the "one and done" treatment. I have no worthwhile objections here.
And that leaves us with Jesse Orosco, another ballot first-timer. I don't feel bad for Orosco that he was bounced from the ballot, but I do feel let down for baseball. The BBWAA electorate has only recently come to hesitant terms with what a closer relief pitcher has to accomplish in order to be considered Hall measure. They haven't yet had that discussion about middle relievers. I am not at all ready to take a position on the matter, but Orosco represented one of the best opportunities to have that discussion with a live example, as he is one of the most accomplished middle relievers in baseball history. If he'd gotten just enough (Baines level) support to stay on the ballot, that discussion could have progressed -- but no, and now, if it is ever to be raised, will have to be raised on the shoulders of a less-accomplished pitcher. The Orosco chance is gone, and it may be a while before another MR reaches the ballot who could drive that discussion, sustain the dialogue, get the debate bubbling. Maybe MRs are not Hall worthy, but wouldn't it be better to kick the notion around for a while instead of accepting it by fiat? Sorry, Jesse, you could have held aloft a torch for a few years, but it was too quickly snuffed.
Added thought, whomever was the writer who did cast the one vote for Orosco, is someone whose hand I'd like to shake, and ask why he did cast that vote.
Headliner first-time probable candidates for 2010: Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, and Fred McGriff. Should be interesting.
Friday, January 02, 2009
Rockette Man
This has nothing to do with baseball.
For Christmas, in her stocking, Amalie got two tickets to see the Radio City Rockettes at the Erwin Center here in Austin. The national touring group of Rockettes was here on December 30-31, and her tickets were for the early (4:00 pm) show on the first day. It was her choice to bring either Val or me, and she decided to ask me to drive. (Partly she was being equitable, as Val had taken her to another Christmas show some ten days earlier, in which her piano teacher was part of the band.)
Song-and-dance shows aren't really my thing -- I grew up somewhat close to NYC but never went to see the Rockettes, nor had any desire to -- but as dad, I happily agreed to go along.
Parking was dismal, and traffic control nonexistent. We finally stowed the car near the Capital, and walked. It wasn't so bad.
Waiting to get in (it didn't take too long), I noticed two things about the crowd. One, other children tended to be girls, and they were dressed up in holiday finery, which was nice to see. Two, a great deal of the crowd was senior citizens. I can only speculate, but at a guess, many of these people either had seen the Rockettes before and had enjoyed the show, or were hoping that the lifelong hype and expectations were met.
We found our seats -- very high up, but the view was good except for being partially obstructed by a lighting fixture -- and I was soon dispatched for a pretzel and water. The concession clerks were pathetically inept, and the show had started by the time I got back, but after that everything went well.
The dancers are very good at what they do; the choreography was snappy, including the famous kicking lines, but also the more scattered dance bits were fun and delightful. One number used a prop bus, which rotated (and the tires spun) to synchronize with a background of moving through New York streets, while street-dressed characters pranced the stage and the main dancers rode the bus. It was quite a production! There was one story about kids who have doubts about Santa Claus, until he helps them believe, with one segment of some 40 Santas dancing in formation (words alone cannot fully describe the visual feast of this image). Plenty of classic Christmas songs along with exclusive tunes. There was even a small skating rink at the forefront of the extended stage, though there was only one, brief skating sequence.
I enjoyed the show quite a lot, while Amalie was enraptured the entire show. No fidgeting, no fussing. She sat there, watched, listened, and enjoyed (while slowly eating her pretzel). After we got home, she couldn't tell Mommy enough about it.
Good, fun entertainment. Four stars. If the Rockettes are coming to your area, consider checking out this legendary troupe. I think you'll be glad you did.
For Christmas, in her stocking, Amalie got two tickets to see the Radio City Rockettes at the Erwin Center here in Austin. The national touring group of Rockettes was here on December 30-31, and her tickets were for the early (4:00 pm) show on the first day. It was her choice to bring either Val or me, and she decided to ask me to drive. (Partly she was being equitable, as Val had taken her to another Christmas show some ten days earlier, in which her piano teacher was part of the band.)
Song-and-dance shows aren't really my thing -- I grew up somewhat close to NYC but never went to see the Rockettes, nor had any desire to -- but as dad, I happily agreed to go along.
Parking was dismal, and traffic control nonexistent. We finally stowed the car near the Capital, and walked. It wasn't so bad.
Waiting to get in (it didn't take too long), I noticed two things about the crowd. One, other children tended to be girls, and they were dressed up in holiday finery, which was nice to see. Two, a great deal of the crowd was senior citizens. I can only speculate, but at a guess, many of these people either had seen the Rockettes before and had enjoyed the show, or were hoping that the lifelong hype and expectations were met.
We found our seats -- very high up, but the view was good except for being partially obstructed by a lighting fixture -- and I was soon dispatched for a pretzel and water. The concession clerks were pathetically inept, and the show had started by the time I got back, but after that everything went well.
The dancers are very good at what they do; the choreography was snappy, including the famous kicking lines, but also the more scattered dance bits were fun and delightful. One number used a prop bus, which rotated (and the tires spun) to synchronize with a background of moving through New York streets, while street-dressed characters pranced the stage and the main dancers rode the bus. It was quite a production! There was one story about kids who have doubts about Santa Claus, until he helps them believe, with one segment of some 40 Santas dancing in formation (words alone cannot fully describe the visual feast of this image). Plenty of classic Christmas songs along with exclusive tunes. There was even a small skating rink at the forefront of the extended stage, though there was only one, brief skating sequence.
I enjoyed the show quite a lot, while Amalie was enraptured the entire show. No fidgeting, no fussing. She sat there, watched, listened, and enjoyed (while slowly eating her pretzel). After we got home, she couldn't tell Mommy enough about it.
Good, fun entertainment. Four stars. If the Rockettes are coming to your area, consider checking out this legendary troupe. I think you'll be glad you did.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
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.
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.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
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.
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.
Friday, December 12, 2008
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.
Watching this fills me with pride and joy.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
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.
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 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.
Monday, December 08, 2008
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)
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%
Post-1942 ballot (48 of 64, 75%, needed for election)
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%
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
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.
Saturday, December 06, 2008
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).
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
