What changes do you think need to be made to the HOF? Additionally at 4:36 that is a picture of hall of fame pitcher Pete Alexander also known as Grover Cleveland Alexander, not Cy Young. Got some pictures mixed up in the editing process. I guess I am a jabroni 😂
Whole thing should be overhauled. Too much OPINION involved. It's not supposed to be opinionated, it's supposed to be 'how did that guy do against his MLB peers'. That's it. Simple.
The problem with some of your suggestions on changing the voting process are: 1) Forcing voters to vote for 10 players... Many years, there aren't 10 guys worth voting for. 2) Fan votes... Are you serious? Are we talking about the same fans that screw up the all star voting every year?
too many guys trying to make statements with their votes by punishing guys who deserve...every yr i see guys who played like 2 seasons as a bench player get more votes than guys who played 10+ yrs with multiple allstars
I think there should be a fan vote where it’s a pool of any eliminated players with at least one vote in past induction years. Only one player is selected every year.
When players like Willie Mays, Henry Aaron, Babe Ruth, Ted Williams and a host of others did not receive 100% of the votes, you know the system is screwed up. I hated Bonds, but even if you throw out all his stats from when he juiced, he had a HoF career.
@@csnide6702 no kidding. Bonds had some of the most insanely dominant seasons at ages 36-39. While most players at that age are slowing down, retiring, and dealing with injuries, he was hitting 50-70 homers a year. Lol give me a break. Also there’s no telling when he started taking roids. Canseco was taking them back in the 80s. It is reasonable to assume that he just upped his dose in the late 90s-2000s. Or maybe he didn’t take them before he ballooned in size. No one knows. And that’s the point. All we know is he’s a cheater
Fan voting isn't a terrible idea but current HOFers voting is an excellent idea. Many of those guys played with and against those on the ballots. They would arguably have the best perspective on who gets in. Honestly though, how all the individual awards are decided is pretty bogus.
Yeah I would say the fan vote would be weighed the least because of obvious bias and issues we’ve seen with all star voting. But when even the writers are saying the system is broken, I’d give anything new a try at this point
Disagree. Have you ever seen what fan voting does to the All Star roster? The reason writers vote is the idea of impartiality, at least as far as being impartial no matter the team you played for. Naturally, if fans vote, there will end up being scrubs in the Hall due to trolling, undeserving players who were fan favorites in the hall.
You’re not wrong with the brigading that fans will do to the vote. That’s why my proposal is IF the fans are allowed to vote, their votes are weighed much less than experts and analysts votes for example
@@JabroniBaseball That's why I've been a firm believer in the logic: THE FAN VOTE IS EQUAL TO 5% OF THE BALLOT. 5% is the sweet spot for a fan vote: 5% is not enough of a share of the ballot for the fans to get a meme player into the HOF unless the regular voters were already close to letting the player in anyways, but 5% is enough that a player the fans vote in would be guaranteed to make the ballot next season even if no other voter votes for them- which is the type of thing you'd want for the fans' choice.
Love the idea of the HOFers voting. Fans voting would be good in small weight and should be weighted where a player can't be removed from the ballot after 1 year if the fans support them enough
I’m a Giants fan. Timmy was my hero but he is not a Hall of Famer. I still think you need to play at a high level for at least a decade. Timmy fell apart after like five seasons.
I'm a Twins fan, and I'd apply the same case to Lincecum that I apply to Johan Santana. 5 years of being the best pitcher in baseball beats 15 very good ones like Mike Mussina. Both deserve better than they got.
Remember when Brett Butler , Robby Thompson and Kevin Mitchell were underrated , and Will Clark was way overrated . Some bay area newspaper compared Clark to Lou Gehrig . I would vote for Mark Grace over Will any day and twice on Sunday !
Koufax did not play at a high level for 10 years actually just 5 years. Would you say he was not a HOFer?? Yes I know he has 3 CYs which Tim doesn't (2 CYs). Also what is considered a high level?? If you are talking high level as dominate that is more likely an inner circle HOFer. to follow up further (H. Greenberg, P. Martinez, R. Kiner, J. Robinson, B. Feller R. Youngs, A.Joss, R. Campanella, J Mauer B. Dickey, M. Cochrane, Y.. Berra, G.Carter, I. Rodriguez (it is very hard for a catcher to have 10 high level seasons all had less than 10 seasons of what would be considered high level seasons, so are they really not HOF worthy, because they had between 6-9 such seasons. J. DiMaggio only had 11, so he just kind of made your cut off. I used a WAR of 4.3 as an indicator of high level for a season (I know that WAR is not the be all, end all sat to make a analysis of a player). J Bench is just at your required ten years. YET, all are in the HOF still. If you went with your required 10 years there wouldn't be any catchers besides Bench, M. Piazza and C. Fisk (who played the later part of his career in the outfield or DH. All those names I listed, I feel, were definitely HOFers even without your 10 year requirement you stated. Think about it DiMaggio, Feller and Greenberg lost 3+ years of their prime to serving during WWII. Maybe ten is a bit high. Maybe 5 is when we should give serious that to a player- Koufax being the precedent. He was a HOFer and most would agree I would say. If you think about it if Ted Williams did not make it back from serving in Korea he would have only had 9 years of high level years. And I would say (may be biased even as a Yankee fan, and that he is my favorite player of all times) he would be a HOFer without the years after the Korean War, he lost 5 years of his prime to serving during two wars. He would be numbers which would be in the same numbers categories as Mays, Aaron, Ruth Bonds and A-Rod if he didn't miss those 5 years.
Mariano Rivera deserved to be in the Hall but absolutely DID NOT deserve to be the 1st and so far, only player to be 100% unanimous. That's just ridiculous. The guy averaged, what, 60-70 innings a year? The Yankees were so strong in 1996-2000 that they would have won titles anyway even without Rivera. He wasn't even the closer in 1996. I remember him mainly for his 2 biggest failures: Blowing the 2001 World Series, then the 2004 ALCS.
@@nerothelost9605 WAR isn’t the end all be all. I understand it can be accurate, but at the end of the day it’s a hypothetical stat. Concrete stats are more important because they illustrate the actual output of a player.
@@gators-rock-tim-t9247 It was a good thing Dave Kingman's career ended before he got there, otherwise that number's status as a auto ticket would have been ruined long before the PEDs issues got out of control.
Few people mention Steve Garvey in discussions such as these. Ten-time all-star, a league MVP with MVP votes in nine seasons, and four gold gloves. He was one of the most well-known players of his era.
@@toddsmith5715 One thing that's clear to me is that there are a lot of great, memorable players who are not in the Hall of Fame No one is saying that Garvey wasn't a stud, he clearly was I don't think the Hall of Fame would be watered down if it had 500-1000 players for example but that's a matter of opinion
Jeff Kent the worst snub ever !!! 290 career batting average ! 377 hrs !! 1518 rbis !! 2461 hits ! Show me another second baseman with those numbers ! Almost forgot won an MVP in the height of the steroid era !
@@sirekumasutra7022 it’s just hard to believe that a second baseman with those numbers is not in the Hall of Fame. I believe he has the best numbers of any second baseman ever.
@@jamesonrapp281 It also doesn't help that his career before that while decent was also nothing mind blowing. I wouldn't be surprised if it led to some people thinking he may be juicing.
@@rUsHiSm I kinda like 'on the base pads'. I might start using this as well. Just to annoy the too- tightly-starched, conservative, old-timey traditions preservers.
Kenny Lofton and Lou Whitaker are the two most obvious omissions, I really don't get. Both were respected and beloved by their peers, as well as fans. Not a good look for Cooperstown to have them excluded. Veterans committee needs to fix this ASAP.
Amen. Lofton was a KEY part of the most potent offense and one of the best teams (the Indians) in the late 90s. And his defense was Gold Glove level. He should be in.
Dale needs to be in. WAR is not the best system. Cal ripken has a better war than tony gwynn and chipper jones. Ripken had.276 BA and Strikeout 1309 times. Gwynn had 69.2 but cal had 90.5 WAR. WAR does not work.
I absolutely agree with you regarding how players are chosen for the HoF. Boycotting the steroid era players out of spite is a solid example of how ludicrous the current system is. And, your explanation of why there are numerous selection methods other than the Baseball Writers is spot on correct. We definitely need better selection criteria and a better selection process, but who is going to make those changes? Who has the power and the authority to make those decisions? I think this is a classic Catch 22 situation akin to expecting Congress to pass a budget on time.
@@kennethpeterson4068 “evil” is an interesting standard. There are many evil bastards in the Hall, and if you disagree, you have no business in this conversation. But you think Curt is especially evil? Why? Did he kill someone? I know he made a big error in revealing Tim Wakefield’s news…but is that SO evil that he should not be honored in the Hall? Who else is too “evil” in your mind?
The man defrauded an entire state out of 10s of millions of dollars and then went on to be very loud and vocal about his very hateful opinions. Unfortunately for Curt, in the year 2024, people try not to give recognition to garbage people regardless of what they have accomplished. Curt forgot to human beings get to decide who gets remembered, be mad at him for destroying his own legacy.
Sorry but I don’t think Lincecum is a Hall of Famer. He had a couple GREAT seasons and some very good ones but that’s not enough. If a guy like King Felix doesn’t get a lot of votes and was better for longer than no hope for Timmy.
@@adamalexander3963 bro you’re not wrong at all🤣the MLB is not the NBA. He should’ve stuck to guys like Sweet Lou and Pete Rose if he really wanted to make a case. Hell make the whole video about Billy Wagner but cmon not Timmy
I agree, but I also don't think it is a bad thing to keep some people out based on them being just terrible people. Like, lets say Wander Franco had the career we all thought he might have, and then after retirement, but before he was up for induction, the news about him being a scumbag came out. Don't you agree that the hall of fame should not let him in? On the other hand, despite thinking Schilling is an ass, he shouldn't be kept out just because he's an ass.
@@snerdterguson I think it’s unlikely that he’d be the only one in Cooperstown. I think what he did is despicable, but baseball also dealt with it long before the hall of fame became an issue.
@@DanielSong39 Even more- the very first class had Ty Cobb; even if it's claimed most of the POS stories were a biased biographer, there's claims Cobb threw at least one game.
@@ronaldmanuel732 Oh, I agree, and Mr. Trammel does, too. Of that, I am sure! They need to change a few rules for the Baseball HOF! Phil Rizzuto gets in, but Dave Concepcion doesn't with FAR better numbers???
@@usaveteran-retired6464 Alan Trammel is in the HOF, though he wasn't voted in by the writers. How do you figure that Dave Concepcion has FAR better numbers than Phil Rizzuto? Rizzuto had a higher lifetime batting average, OPS and OPS+. Their career WAR is basically the same, but Concepcion played more seasons, and Rizzuto lost his age 25, 26 and 27 seasons to service in World War 2.
There is no way Tim Lincecum had a long enough peak to be considered for the HOF. Yes he was absolutely fantastic for a few seasons but it wasn’t long enough
There’s still a lot of recency bias when it comes Lincecum. Most of the guys who run these baseball channels “grew up” watching him so they have that weird nostalgia. When comparing him to pitchers of past eras who had great peaks but didn’t make the hall of fame(Fernando Valenzuela, Rick Sutcliffe, Mike Scott) he doesn’t even stack up to them.
@@joshdelagarza231 There was a 3 year stretch or so where Lincecum was an absolute beast but you are correct with your assessment. I remember Fernandomania. Dwight Gooden had a longer peak as well. All these guys need to do is look at the stats. It’s more than obvious Tim wasn’t good for long enough
If Harold Baines can get in, the barrier for entry is clearly not the holdup. Also, Big Time Timmy Jim is definitely Hall of Very Good, but I don’t know if he belongs in Cooperstown.
THANK YOU! If I have to argue about the Mattingly vs Puckett stats being within 1% of each stat different between the two I think I'll have an aneurysm
@@JabroniBaseball I can put down the numbers next to each other and no one can tell the difference haha. Which player had 2 more doubles or 3 less RBI haha
The fact that TJ Quinn mentions Eddie Murphy's name being brought up alongside Albert Belle as players that writers wanted to punish is ridiculous. I love that Murray who was burned by the press early on, he then refused to talk to them ever after, put up such enormous career numbers that they didn't dare leave him off their ballots. Murray didn't behave in the way that Albert Belle did, he simply felt that reporters had lied about his family members and refused to grant interviews after that. Murray never had a single off field incident in his career and all of his teammates especially Cal ripken loved him, so for reporters to bring up his name as one they can't wait to leave off the ballot shows how disgusting and petty these "writers" can be. Murray even alluded to this in his Hall of Fame speech.
Mandating that each ballot contain 10 votes is ludicrous. What if the member honestly does not think there are 10 worthy candidates. I like the idea of allowing as many selections as desired much better. This way nobody has to not-vote for a sure-fire candidate in order to spare another from dropping off.
They don’t have to vote for ten unless it was changed, ten is the maximum. To address your second point, there are never more than ten sure fire shoe-in HOFers, usually only one or two.
To quote: "my top four players who should absolutely be in the HoF." Jabroni Baseball listed: 1 -- Keith Hernandez -------- Oh yeah, most definitely. 2 -- Don Mattingly -------- Hernandez first, then we can talk about Mattingly. 3. -- Lou Whitaker -------- Stats do not help him much, big accumulator. Great dWAR for his era, prolly the leader among 2Bs. Not a lot of peer recognition via AS games. If Trammel deserves to be there, Whitaker should be there as well. 4 -- Tim Lincecum -------- If your Hall values 'peak value' strongly ...then yeah, put him in. -------- If your Hall values 'career value' strongly ...prolly a pass. -------- Four great HoF-level seasons, and a string of OK to mediocre seasons to string out his career. Just one viewer's opinions.
Dale Murphy Fred McGriff Don Mattingly Should all be in. Donnie Baseball was literally a face if not the face of baseball from 85 to 90. And was statistically the best player in baseball in the late 80s.
Mattingly is extremely borderline. I would not vote for him but if he was elected I would not view it as some sort of outrage. He was the best player in the AL over a four year stretch.
@@BriggsSeekins LMAO, Donnie Baseball had way better stats than Murphy and Mcgriff did if u take the best 10 yrs of their career just not in HRs. And Donnie played in the harder American League with better batting comp. than the national League just had 1 good hitter Tony G. Murphy is a career 265 hitter!
10 Year Peaks WAR Avg. OBP SLG HR Mattingly 4.0 .310 .361 .479 22 Olerud 4.8 .305 .411 .484 20 Beltran 5.6 .285 .367 .510 29 B. Williams 4.9 .312 .395 .507 25 D. Parker 4.1 .305 .354 .496 23 A. Belle 4.0 .298 .373 .570 41 Hernandez 5.1 .303 .394 .448 13 Even going on 10 year peak and not career, if Mattingly deserves it, then there are sure a lot of other players that do too...
I 100% disagree with use all ten or lose your ability to vote. There are ballots where ten are absolutely not worthy of being in the Hall. Forcing people to vote for ten turns into the Hall of Very Good and not the Hall of Fame. There are already too many questionable players in it let's not make it even worse. Of the four you say absolutely should be in I would only agree with one. That is Whitaker.
Tim lincecum was really good in those few years but he shouldn’t be in the hall. Which a career war of 20 that’s way too low. His career was way too short.
Even though there are nearly twice as many teams and almost 2.5 times as many players (assuming 20 men on a roster back in the 40s), I don't think the number of superstars and Hall of Fame caliber players nearly doubled. Presumably, they are more spread out instead of the Yankees having so many.
And it's not just the greater number of teams, it's the fact that a starting lineup is 10 players now thanks to the DH, and we have a 5-man starting pitcher rotation vs. the 3-man rotation in the 1930s.
Dave Parker has more Home Runs RBI Hits ,Runs Total Bases,By a large margin over Mattingly and Keith Hernandez. Dave leads Hsll of Famer Jim Rice in almost every hitting category except Home Runs. When Rice was elected Parker only received about 10% of the vote. Parker also leads in Put Outs and Assists. Parker played most of his home games at hitter unfriendly Riverfront and Three Rivers Stadiums. Rice played all of his home games at Fenway Park.
Three Rivers and Riverfront were hitter friendly parks. Only Wrigley (with the wind blowing out) and the Braves park were friendlier. Astrodome , Dodger Stadium , Busch Stadium, Olympic Stadium, Candlestick , and Shea were pitcher friendly parks in the NL in that era.
@@robertmurdock1848 Are you in fantasyland?? Fenway Park is as hitter friendly for a Right Handed Pull Hitter as you can get. Routine 310 ‘ Fly balls go for HRs. Routine outs at Three Rivers and Riverfront. Johnny Vench would have averaged 40-45 HRs a year at Fenway. Parker still managed 339 And leads Rice in all other offensive categories RBIs ,Hits ,Runs,Total Bases.
@@buddyvilla7393 That must explain why the top 3 HR hitters in Sox history are left handers. I'm disputing your description of Riverfront and Three Rivers as hitter unfriendly, they were the opposite. Joe Morgan went from a peak of 15 homers and an average of 10 in Houston, to nearly double that in Cincy. There's a reason Cincinnati's only CY winner came in the shortened COVID season, their ballparks have been very hitter friendly since the days of Crosley Field.
Doc gooden is much more deserving of the hall than Tim Lincecum. Doc was much more dominant in his peak. Maybe had the best season in MLB history in 1985. He could easily have won the Cy young in his rookie season as well. His overall numbers are better than Lincecum too.
Amazing video! I’m amazed that all those people you mentioned aren’t in. Hearing about this makes me sad I no longer have the pictures I took when I went to Cooperstown when I was 12(2008)
I agree with a lot of this but the steroid thing is bothersome to me. The record books were ruined in my opinion during this era. I am also not a fan of someone like Bonds and ARod who cooked their entire careers getting the accolades they have. I don't have an answer that is satisfactory.
Agreed. I saw Lincecum pitch when he had the stuff. It was amazing. I've seen Maddux pitch, (in multiple decades) and Lincecum was every bit as good. But like you point out, 4 STELLAR and 6 AWFUL seasons.
if a person gets in on the 8th ballot, it doesn't mean they should have gotten in earlier. It means that in those earlier years, there was probably people more deserving to go in. Maybe the voters only voted a handful of people and hadn't really looked into a players numbers.
You’re spot on with that. I was more so talking about the voters who didn’t vote for a player on ballots 1-6 for example, while also not using all 10 of their votes. But then on ballots 7 voting for a player all of a sudden
Fernando Valenzuela & Orel Hershiser should be in the Hall of Fame. They were awesome in the ‘80s. I recently moved near Cooperstown and visited the Hall of Fame 1st chance I got and I was surprised at the amount of Fernando Valenzuela related items and stats on display, yet he’s not in the Hall of Fame. That’s a shame.
These writers need to get over themselves. The whole "steroid era" pretty much saved baseball after the strike. Everyone turned a blind eye to it when Bonds, Sosa and McGuire were going at it. Once they served their purpose, that's when everything came out. Also, I've been a lifelong Donny Baseball fan boy. I'd like to see him in. And Pete Rose. And Joe Jackson.
Read this with a nice tone, cause I’m not being a wise guy. I think if anyone, like me, grew up in the 80’s, you didn’t hear a lot at all about Lou and Keith. They always seemed like decent players, but secondary to other dudes. They’re good, but like, Jack Morris good, and he shouldn’t be in.
I think that speaks more about the media than their baseball ability Keith actually did get some press in his prime, he won an MVP and several Gold Gloves
I enjoyed this video immensely, I agreed with a lot you had to say, not everything, but most points. The one suggestion I really disagree with is the suggestion of letting fans vote for who gets in. If you think the writers have a particular bias against certain players, it would be far worse if the fans were allowed to vote. Keep up the great work, I enjoy your videos!!!
Glad you enjoyed it! These videos are a lot of fun to make. I can absolutely agree with you on the fan voting. If that was ever allowed, I wouldn’t let it be more that 5% of the vote while the other 95% goes to professionals on and off the field. That way we don’t run into fan bias and ballot stuffing.
Dale Murphy needs to get in. Two-time MVP and 5-time GG winner in the '80s. Every one of his peers will tell you he deserves it. Plus he did it the right way w/o any hint of impropriety. Its a shame.
Mattingly and Murphy is the 2 names i hear the most, If Murphy had a 280 BA he would already be in, the career 265 BA is what's keeping him out from what i hear.
@@blakecscott5525 The Hall is too exclusive to get in. Two time MVP in a single decade should be in. Period. Full stop. If Murph doesn't get in then Bonds, Big Mac, Rose etc. can all rot as far as I am concerned. They broke rules simple as that.
I 100% agree it needs a overhaul. There's some other players as well i would like to be looked at as also. Like Alfonso Soriano and Gary Sheffield. I agree with Kenny Lofton, Don Mattingly, and Keith Hernadez being looked at as well. And i know that the war stat likes to be used. As a measurement, for players. But that's one stat i'm not a fan of. Because there's been a lot of mvp winners that didn't have a high war stat. Doesn't mean they weren't a good player. That's why i don't hold that stat in high regard, as some do. I also want to add, there is another system i'm not in favor of. With the curren era and such. And that is the 5 man rotation and at this rate there will be a 6 man rotation. I really believe that will hurt baseball, more then it actually helps. Injuries are apart of any sport. There's no way to eliminate all injuries in any sport. So i think it makes things even worse, by babying players in any sport.
Curt Schilling should be there sitting at 79.5WAR. Broke so many records. 216 wins with career ERA of 3.46, 3 World Championships a 11-2 record in post season. 5 make it or go home games wining 4 of them and his team wining all five. Bloody sock game. Had multiple seasons of 300 strikeout seasons and only dident win a cy young cause he was paired up with the big unit in his prime. Co world series MVP 2001. Championship series 1993. Multiple allstar appearances. Having the best first half a season out of anybody in 2002. Also Randy and Curt was the first pair to both make 300 strikeouts in a season on the same team same year 2002. dude is a legend 20 seasons went out on top with a world series win in game 2 in 2007.
Fan voting for the HoF would be a terrible idea as the lack of in depth knowledge, the overly emotional tendencies of many who vote, and the short term thinking of the average American would negatively impact an already questionable system for voting in new members. Maybe a coin flip with the best two out of three being the deciding factor.
Fantastic video. I would agree with all of your choices that should be in the hall, however, I am a bit disappointed that you did not mention Thurman Munson. Avg, number of games caught, caught stealing percentage compared to the yearly average, and postseason are enough to have him waltz in to the hall.
Tim Lincecum? A Hall of Famer? You might as well put in Brandon Webb and Jake Peavy at that point. All 3 of them had fantastic peaks in the 2000s but got crippled with injuries. Tbh I wouldn't put any of them in the Hall.
@@shoukatsukaiI’m just pointing out lack of longevity wasn’t an excuse for Koufax not getting in. There doesn’t seem to be an actual standard set of stats, just opinions of sportswriters (who COULD be biased.)
@@rumblehat4357 I agree with the lack of standardized rules on what really makes a Hall of Famer makes it a joke. It's just that comparing Lincecum with Koufax doesn't warrant a discussion bc one was far and away a better player and earned a Hall of Fame spot.
Given the attitudes of SOME members of the BBWAA, it is no wonder Ted Williams had such a sour attitude toward the press. And, of course, Ted is one of perhaps 50-100 players all-time who, in the minds of most serious followers of The Game, are AUTOMATIC selections.
A group of just HOF players that vote on player(s) that they think should inducted beside them. Might be one player per year from this group, or possible % if your going to allow more than one player to be inducted Who else is more qualified to deside who should be in the HOF, then the players that played and have already been inducted already.
I’m definitely pro “Small Hall.” Should be reserved for the greatest of the greatest. Not very good or even great, but legendary. The players that pass the eye test and you just know are heads and shoulders above everyone else. Hard to explain but I feel like people just know it when they see it. Letting anybody and everybody is what’s turned the Naismith into a joke and even the Pro Football Hall of Fame has gotten way too generous over the years. I have no issue going years without any new members if no one is truly deserving. Don’t just put somebody in just to say you did.
@@bishopthefoolTo be fair the Good Players are elite athletes making a lot of money Even playing 10 years in MLB and retiring with 20 WAR and >$10M in the bank is extremely impressive to Average Joes like us
I keep seeing Lincecum being compared to Sandy Koufax because Koufax had a relatively short prime. I don't see it. Lincecum's HoF candidacy rests on only two seasons, 08 and 09, and his WAR is under 20. Koufax, short as his prime was, put in six straight HoF-worthy seasons including a four-year run with a 1.86 ERA and 0.91 WHIP. That's legendary dominance. If you want a legit comparison, Lincecum fans would be better off pointing to Dizzy Dean. Another ace with a short prime. He still had five HoF seasons and was the ace of one of the most memorable teams in history, so he still has a better case than Lincecum, but he was nowhere near as masterful as Koufax and probably got into Cooperstown more because of his personality than his legit accolades. But even lowering the bar to the Dizzy Dean standard, Lincecum is still probably coming up short.
I agree with your changes to voting process. Expand the voter pool. Remove the cap on number of players a voter can select all make sense. However, you can't mandate making the voters select a certain number of players as their work around would be to vote for very undeserving candidates as a protest. I don't disagree with your annoyance over how the voters have handled the PED issue, but to be fair to them it's a complicated issue. Not sure how you can have a Hall of Fame without Bonds, Clemens or Rodriguez, but there's something about Rafael Palmeiro getting in that seems wrong. So there's a line somewhere not sure where, but it does exist. I also think it's entirely fair for a voter to withhold a vote from a player that despite any evidence used PED's (if that's a dealbreaker for you). This isn't a court of law. No one is being sent to jail. We are deciding which great players get an extra honor. So pretty much anything outside of a petty, personal grievance seems entirely in bounds as long as one is consistent with it. My advice to is to avoid getting worked up about a HOF candidate's election %. Who cares if one player gets in with 81.4% and another guy gets in with 86.7%? It doesn't tell you anything about their career or impact in the game. Be happy when your favorite players get in and move on. Focusing on this will only make you upset. As to your list of HOF snubs at the end, with the exception of Lou Whitaker they are all a No for me. Simple reason that for each one you named, there a 4 others who have just as good a resume as the player you chose. Keep in mind I had a Don Mattingly poster in my room as a kid and I named my dog Matty in honor of him, so I don't need anyone to explain how amazing he was at his peak. The problem is that he did hurt his back, and post 1988 he was a good, but not great player for half a decade and then hung them up. How do you select him for example, but not Will Clark or Magglio Ordonez who both posted very similar (if not better) stats? As to Tim Lincecum, I don't even know what to say. Yes, he was dominant for 2 or 3 seasons and then got hurt. That's a pretty common story. How does Tim Lincecum earn a selection over Johan Santana, Dwight Gooden, Fernando Valenzuela, Vida Blue, Sam McDowell, Ron Guidy or Luis Tiant Jr. who all have far better career numbers and seasons of dominance? Heck even Jose Rijo's peak (67-39 149 ERA+) was as good as Tim's (62-36 143 ERA+).
I always thought Johan Santana should've been a Hall of Famer. Like Tim Lincecum and Sandy Koufax, his peak was short due to injuries, but his peak is absolutely Hall of Fame worthy.
In addition to lowering the percentage needed to get in and uncapping the number of votes, I also don't think anyone should ever be taken out of contention, either because of time or low percentages. Perceptions can change.
Can't say I disagree with you at all on that. If perceptions can change, let people stay indefinitely on the ballots especially since they passed the committee to get on to begin with
Tim Lincecum was a God to me. As a young Giants fan growing up in the early 2000s, he absolutely CAPTIVATED not just Giants fans but even those of the opposing teams. The amount of presence he had whenever he stepped on the mound was nothing short of mind boggling. I remember being at the game where he was presented with his second Cy Young Award, and 10 year old me was thinking to myself that he just HAD to be in the hall, because it just didn't make sense to me how anyone could just be that good and not be hall of fame worthy. All these years later, and I knew he most likely wouldn't make the hall due to his injuries, but I still feel like the sheer and utter dominance he held for those years just needs to be acknowledged.
I couldn't agree more with you. I'm a Mets fan and I tried to catch every single Lincecum start I could. I know a lot of other fans of other teams that felt the same way. The dude defined what an ace was for a generation
@@JabroniBaseball He's such a fascinating person with an equally fascinating career, and I've even been greatly considering making a huge video on my own channel all about his rise and eventual fall, because there's so much more to his story that most people don't know, and it's a story that people need to hear
The Hall of Fame is a museum. Go to the Hall of Fame. You will undoubtedly see something pertaining to Tim Lincecum. Did he have 2 outstanding years in 08 and 09…..Yes. Do those 2 years make him a Hall of Famer……Hell no. Tim Lincecum played 10 years. First half was good. Second half was shit. It’s happened to PLENTY of players throughout baseball history.
I am only halfway through the video and have to say well done. It was very informative to say the least. You forced me subscribe. Keep up the good work.
I’ve clearly forgot about Albert Belle. There is no doubt that Albert Belle deserve to be in the Hall of Fame.. including guys like Barry Bonds, Roger Clemmons, Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Pete Rose , Dick Allen and Joe Jackson will deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. The writers have no business to vote.. especially wasting everybody’s time they didn’t have the guts to vote these guys in the hall… This is absolutely murder .
I agree with most of what you say... But players who 100% used steroids and it made them huge stars such as bonds, A-rod, and others... They definitely don't deserve to be in the HoF with or without an asterisk. That said... Keeping players out because they played during the era is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Crazy to me someone like Mattingly isn't in either.
I think that's a fair POV to have. Its a pretty divided topic so that's why I think its a good idea to have different opinions in the voting process and let these players in or keep them out depending on the weight of the collective votes.
Keith Hernandez is way too pushy, such as the time he asked Jerry to help him move, after only having known Jerry for a few weeks. But in all seriousness, Piazza's "bacne" is infamous, he's a known roider.
I enjoyed your presentation and admire the obvious preparation. We generally disagree, which is ok, but you've made good points. Recency bias is a big problem, and the PEDs. Most important, as you noted, are better/clearer guidelines for voters.
Tim maximized his time during an era when teams did not protect players as much against high pitch counts. You're talking about an already undersized pitcher with an extremely high work rate. He was always going to burn out fast, but he put up career numbers in his first handful of years. If you give your body to the game and are one of the best at it, you deserve your place in the Hall.
And yet, disregarding the big 3: Bonds, Clemens, and ARod whose complaints are very specific, the Hall has more of a problem letting in undeserving players than it does keeping deserving players out. Ted Simmons, Harold Baines, Jack Morris, Tony Perez, Bill Mazeroski, Gil Hodges, Jim Kaat and more don't have hall of fame stats-- not in WAR and not in flat stats. I can name 10 guys that are more deserving... not that I'm advocating for them either-- the bar should go up, not sideways. It is good that the Hall is overly selective. It is good that Hall voters have high criticism. It's even good that personal biases are gatekeepers-- that won't last forever, and by the time they're gone, only the greatest will be considered. When Garvey, Murphy, and Mattingly (all of whom have an average WAR well under 4) start getting in, the Hall will suffer. Sure, Bonds, Clemens, ARod, and probably Sosa, Mcgwire and Palmeiro were great enough to get in, but we all understand why they aren't... You can't trust their stats. If they really deserve it like Bonds and Clemens, they will get in when the controversy has fizzled out.
No argument with your HOF selections except Lincecum. There are just TOO many forgotten greats who won twice as many games, frequently contributing to the game for decades afterward than to honor one who was dominant for 3 seasons. And in 4 of his bare minimum 10 seasons he posted a sub .500 winning percentage!
Votes need to be taken seriously. It is disgraceful that voters will not vote for someone because they think no one should be unanimous or should get in on their first year of eligibility. I absolutely hate this reasoning. It is also absurd that players are left off the ballot for egotistical reasons, like they were mean to reporters or hurt someone's feelings on social media. It is also strange that vote percentages will start at 5% and then go to to 75% after 10 years. What did those players do in those years to improve their candidacy. They are either a hall of famer or not so take it seriously. I have been to the hall in Cooperstown twice and thought it was an interesting experience however.
Absolutely spot on. Zero accountability from the writers who just want to troll and preserve writers legacies vs what they should be focusing on. Does this player deserve to be in the hall of fame? yes or no? They're making it way more complicated than it has to be and its destroying the credibility of the hall
The prolem with "vote percentages start at 5% and go up to 75%" is it doesn't account for bumper crop years, especially with the "voters MUST vote for 10 people even if there's not 10 candidates they think are HOF-worthy" that was said in the video. Even then, I'd add a little more complication for a good reason: Originally, players got 15 years on the ballot, not 10. My logic is take a rule from the Wrestling Observer HOF's rules for staying on the ballot (75% to get into the Hall, but if you have been on the ballot for 10 years and received more than 50% of the ballot in the tenth year, you remain on the ballot) for up to five years- but the standard goes up 5% every year for those (11 year needs 55%, 12 needs 60%, 13 needs 65%, 14 needs 70%, and finally year 15 is all or nothing, you either get in at 75% or you're off.)
@@vincenthammons-kd9du Same as it ever was, Ted Williams in 1941, outhit DiMaggio during his 56 game streak. DiMaggio’s OPS through the streak was 1.181, Williams’s OPS during the streak was 1.224, of course that was a minor slump for Ted that season where he finished with a 1.287 OPS. DiMaggio sold more papers though, so despite being ahead of Ted in only one offensive category, RBIs with 125 to Ted's 120, with Ted having 85 fewer at bats mind you, at the rate he was producing he would have reached 142 with DiMaggio's AB volume, Dimaggio received nearly double the 1st place MVP votes. So yeah, GFY if you're not in the pinstripes.
I knew Tim Lincecum never had a shot at the HOF. Baseball HOF voters put more weight on longevity than they do in the other major sports leagues. His body, specifically his hip, just couldn't hold up with his extraordinary pitching stride and delivery. Once injuries caught up with him, he was toast. It was tough seeing his body give out the way it did, because he was absolutely dominant and a lot of fun to watch early in his career. There were flashes of his past greatness in some of those 5 subpar seasons including another no-hitter and World Series championships. Even with his career cut short by injuries, he made more of an impact on the game and the story of baseball than several players who are currently in the HOF. Maybe they can open "Timmy's Dispensary" in Cooperstown...
I agree with you on the guys who should be in but why does it seem to bother people that Harold Baines is in? Did wrong people in a former life? Does it have an adverse affect on your life? The HoF is a celebration of baseball and apparently there were enough people who wanted to celebrate Baines career if you don't that of course is your right and just walk right past his plaque and for get about it, and then really start helping the push to get others who should have been elected in so it can be a true celebration in stead of a controversy
@@moderndaysalvage3976what did harold Haines accomplish in his career to warrant the hall? Hes the batters version of Jamie Moyer.....is Jamie moyer a hall of famer in your book?
@@johnwayne9828 Harold Baines is such a weird outlier in such a strict HOF. He didn't even get to 40 WAR. I agree with you. Baines was a very good player, but not a HOF'er. He's as they say, the Hall of Very Good.
@@msscott22 I'll be honest, I'm not even a fan of using war to judge a player for the hall. After seeing a video saying brian giles should be a hall of famer because he had 50 war, I dont trust war to tell me who is and isnt hall worthy. But Baines got in purely off of longevity and counting stats because he played over 2 decades. If that's how the halls gonna go it, jamie moyer better get his speech ready.
I would have the same system for picking worthy players and have season tickets holders vote with the only rule is that you can’t vote in players best known or spent the most time of their playing career playing for your team, so a Cubs fan can’t vote for a player who played 15 seasons and spent 12 of them with the Chicago Cubs. You vote for any other player eligible from the other 29 teams otherwise the season ticket holder might only vote their teams players who are eligible. I would also make the rule that you must have held a season ticket package for 5 seasons in a row and be 30 years old or older and you would have 5 ballots and your done.
@@JabroniBaseball Not only that, but the votes method is also kind of bullshit in many other ways. When Jackie Robinson only made the HOF by four votes, that should say why the vote totals should not be rendered holy figures.
What makes you think pitchers are more talented now? Velocity? Spin rate? I would argue that pitchers not being able to go deep into games and a reliance on the strikeout makes them LESS talented. They have less to worry about. Less workload. More rest...and yet, they can't stay healthy because they try to throw every pitch at max velocity. That doesn't make them better.
@@dash_r_media No. It doesn't. Location makes hitters less effective. Changing eye level makes hitters less effective. Sequences that effect timing makes hitters less effective. Velocity does very little at the highest level.
@@spacelion4763 I agree, now pitch sequencing is mostly on the catcher but the pitcher needs to put it in the right spot, but I agree that velocity is not talent, I will take location and a starter that can get through the seventh inning over a pitcher that only goes 5 and throws 105 any day of the year
idk, batting averages? also back in the day you could just doctor the ball. there's a bunch of reasons why pitchers are better now. pitching wasn't seen the same way in the early 20th century as it is in the modern era.
I was with you until the Lincecum part. Dude was amazing, but longevity does matter. He was great for 4 years only. Zero good years outside of those 4 as well. His numbers fall far too short of HOF level. He should still get more love though for sure.
@@JabroniBaseball When he retired he was one of only 2 pitchers to be multiple time All-Star, throw multiple No-Hitters, Win multiple World Series, and win multiple Cy Youngs. The other was Sandy Koufax. Since then Justin Verlander and Max Scherzer have joined that club, but all 4 of them should be no brainer HoFers.
They’ll be another pitcher get 300 wins. It will be more rare for sure because of less starts but it will happen. 3000 hits is already rare. There have only been 33 players ever to do it. I think Altuve will get there (mainly bc he wants it and Houston will let him). They already let Craig biggio go out there and play to reach the number when he was no longer good anymore. freeman has a shot as well. Lots of young talent poised to make a run at it also. Bobby Witt Jr seems like a guy who could do it (to name one). Again, 33 is already very small.
Entrusting the HOF & annual player awards to the dilettantes & narcissists in the media was the biggest mistake these leagues and player associations/unions could have ever made. I put no stock into these credentials whatsoever and neither should you.
FYI: the league and players association have nothing to do with HOF voting. The HOF is a separate entity. The fact that players that are banned from MLB can't be inducted was a decision made solely by the HOF. MLB and MLBPA have no say in it.
@@JabroniBaseball Not only that, but there's hypocrisy since it's only used to keep players out. For example there, take a contemporary who was on ballots for the steroid era of Dale Murphy, a pretty good player at his peak, came up just before the steroid era exploded so there's no connection to PEDs...and who was noted for years for being one of the nicest guys in the sport- and yet is a fringe HOFer at best. If "character" is enough to keep the PED users OUT of the Hall of Fame, then why doesn't the character clause take a player teetering on the edge like Murphy and put him IN the HOF as a tiebreaker?
@@thedanholmes "5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played." Directly from baseballhall election rules, its public information you can't just say no it doesn't exist.
Agree on your snubs including Bonds et al. Also Bobby Grich. Dwight Evans. Graig Nettles. The old way still saw great players like Arky Vaughn overlooked because they were in small markets or on poor teams.
@@RupertMumphrey Jones is a pretty easy choice due to his fielding excellence and peak value Willie Randolph, Kenny Lofton would be fine choices for the same reasons Simmons had a good chance but petered out too early
List is decent 👍👍 This would be my list of top players who should be in the Hall. Due to the PED years, I'd honestly prefer to see guys that bet on baseball be included, instead of the PED stars, as their numbers are greatly inflated in some cases. 1. Shoeless Joe Jackson 2. Pete Rose 3. Hal Chase 4. Bill Madlock 5. Don Mattingly 6. Al Oliver 7. Bill Dahlen 8. Deacon Phillippe 9. Thurman Munson 10. Sherry Magee
Judging by this set of criteria Don Mattingly should be in. Absolutely essential to the Yankees in the 80’s and 90’s. Arguably the best 1st baseman of his era. No steroids. No major controversy. He should be in.
Why should "essential to the Yankees" matter? The Yankees were not particularly good during his time there. Under the current playoff format, they would have made the playoffs more frequently, but under the rules of his era, the Yankees only made the playoffs in his final year.
Yup, same. I just watched a video with Sheff talking about his career and it blows my damn mind he's not in just completely based off the court of public opinion on steroids, despite never having been popped for them. Aside from Griffey Jr, Sheff had one of the most memorable batting stances of that time. He's an overall stand up guy as well.
Im doing a separate video on HOF snubs and they are absolutely at the top of my list. They were absolute all time greats compared to their contemporaries at the minimum
Delgado hot booted after 1 year on the ballot because he didnt even get enough votes to stay on the ballot. His only chance is veterans committee 25 years after his retirement. It's a shame, Delgado gets so little respect.
GREAT content overall once again! Just a heads up: "Cy Young," (at about the 4:37 mark) this is a picture of Grover Cleveland Alexander, not Cy Young. No big deal, just wanted to let you know.
I'm totally fine with the drugged players being out. I think the problem is that the number of players has risen through expansion but the number of votes each writer gets has remained at 10. Maybe that should be 20.
It will never make sense to me that David Ortiz was on a list of players linked with PED’s and gets in first ballot but Barry Bonds can never touch the hall
@@Iamhungey Ken Griffey Jr. was one of the most obvious juicers around but still loved the Kid! Let them all in, I say! PEDs are just part of the sport, it would be naive to assume otherwise
One thing that is not really factored in is ballpark and teammates. Rice is in the HOF and played about the same time as Dale Murphy and Dave Parker, and has slighly better stats, BUT he played in Fenway, played with many other great hitters, and played in a league with a DH. Ergo, he was always facing more worn out pitching staffs in a small, hitter-friendly park. Switch the players' teams and the stats would swap as well.
What changes do you think need to be made to the HOF?
Additionally at 4:36 that is a picture of hall of fame pitcher Pete Alexander also known as Grover Cleveland Alexander, not Cy Young. Got some pictures mixed up in the editing process. I guess I am a jabroni 😂
Whole thing should be overhauled. Too much OPINION involved. It's not supposed to be opinionated, it's supposed to be 'how did that guy do against his MLB peers'. That's it. Simple.
The problem with some of your suggestions on changing the voting process are:
1) Forcing voters to vote for 10 players... Many years, there aren't 10 guys worth voting for.
2) Fan votes... Are you serious? Are we talking about the same fans that screw up the all star voting every year?
too many guys trying to make statements with their votes by punishing guys who deserve...every yr i see guys who played like 2 seasons as a bench player get more votes than guys who played 10+ yrs with multiple allstars
I think there should be a fan vote where it’s a pool of any eliminated players with at least one vote in past induction years. Only one player is selected every year.
Get rid of Sportswriters having any power whatsoever. They are biased douchebags.
When players like Willie Mays, Henry Aaron, Babe Ruth, Ted Williams and a host of others did not receive 100% of the votes, you know the system is screwed up.
I hated Bonds, but even if you throw out all his stats from when he juiced, he had a HoF career.
but he STILL juiced.... that DQ's him
@@csnide6702 no kidding. Bonds had some of the most insanely dominant seasons at ages 36-39. While most players at that age are slowing down, retiring, and dealing with injuries, he was hitting 50-70 homers a year. Lol give me a break.
Also there’s no telling when he started taking roids. Canseco was taking them back in the 80s. It is reasonable to assume that he just upped his dose in the late 90s-2000s. Or maybe he didn’t take them before he ballooned in size. No one knows. And that’s the point. All we know is he’s a cheater
@@wm_9640 bingo !
He was a Hall of Famer,before steroids
@@wm_9640 yup - that's the saddest part - Bonds didn't NEED that stuff but did it anyway.
Fan voting isn't a terrible idea but current HOFers voting is an excellent idea. Many of those guys played with and against those on the ballots. They would arguably have the best perspective on who gets in.
Honestly though, how all the individual awards are decided is pretty bogus.
Yeah I would say the fan vote would be weighed the least because of obvious bias and issues we’ve seen with all star voting. But when even the writers are saying the system is broken, I’d give anything new a try at this point
Disagree. Have you ever seen what fan voting does to the All Star roster? The reason writers vote is the idea of impartiality, at least as far as being impartial no matter the team you played for. Naturally, if fans vote, there will end up being scrubs in the Hall due to trolling, undeserving players who were fan favorites in the hall.
You’re not wrong with the brigading that fans will do to the vote. That’s why my proposal is IF the fans are allowed to vote, their votes are weighed much less than experts and analysts votes for example
@@JabroniBaseball That's why I've been a firm believer in the logic: THE FAN VOTE IS EQUAL TO 5% OF THE BALLOT. 5% is the sweet spot for a fan vote: 5% is not enough of a share of the ballot for the fans to get a meme player into the HOF unless the regular voters were already close to letting the player in anyways, but 5% is enough that a player the fans vote in would be guaranteed to make the ballot next season even if no other voter votes for them- which is the type of thing you'd want for the fans' choice.
Love the idea of the HOFers voting. Fans voting would be good in small weight and should be weighted where a player can't be removed from the ballot after 1 year if the fans support them enough
I’m a Giants fan. Timmy was my hero but he is not a Hall of Famer. I still think you need to play at a high level for at least a decade. Timmy fell apart after like five seasons.
I'm a Twins fan, and I'd apply the same case to Lincecum that I apply to Johan Santana. 5 years of being the best pitcher in baseball beats 15 very good ones like Mike Mussina. Both deserve better than they got.
Tim Lincecum was my last favorite baseball player, but I'm voting for Vida Blue for the HOF over the freak everyday of the week.
Remember when Brett Butler , Robby Thompson and Kevin Mitchell were underrated , and Will Clark was way overrated .
Some bay area newspaper compared Clark to Lou Gehrig .
I would vote for Mark Grace over Will any day and twice on Sunday !
@@ancientredwoods8502 Jim Maloney had 3 no hitters .
Koufax did not play at a high level for 10 years actually just 5 years. Would you say he was not a HOFer?? Yes I know he has 3 CYs which Tim doesn't (2 CYs). Also what is considered a high level?? If you are talking high level as dominate that is more likely an inner circle HOFer. to follow up further (H. Greenberg, P. Martinez, R. Kiner, J. Robinson, B. Feller R. Youngs, A.Joss, R. Campanella, J Mauer B. Dickey, M. Cochrane, Y.. Berra, G.Carter, I. Rodriguez (it is very hard for a catcher to have 10 high level seasons all had less than 10 seasons of what would be considered high level seasons, so are they really not HOF worthy, because they had between 6-9 such seasons. J. DiMaggio only had 11, so he just kind of made your cut off. I used a WAR of 4.3 as an indicator of high level for a season (I know that WAR is not the be all, end all sat to make a analysis of a player). J Bench is just at your required ten years. YET, all are in the HOF still. If you went with your required 10 years there wouldn't be any catchers besides Bench, M. Piazza and C. Fisk (who played the later part of his career in the outfield or DH.
All those names I listed, I feel, were definitely HOFers even without your 10 year requirement you stated. Think about it DiMaggio, Feller and Greenberg lost 3+ years of their prime to serving during WWII. Maybe ten is a bit high. Maybe 5 is when we should give serious that to a player- Koufax being the precedent. He was a HOFer and most would agree I would say. If you think about it if Ted Williams did not make it back from serving in Korea he would have only had 9 years of high level years. And I would say (may be biased even as a Yankee fan, and that he is my favorite player of all times) he would be a HOFer without the years after the Korean War, he lost 5 years of his prime to serving during two wars. He would be numbers which would be in the same numbers categories as Mays, Aaron, Ruth Bonds and A-Rod if he didn't miss those 5 years.
Mariano Rivera deserved to be in the Hall but absolutely DID NOT deserve to be the 1st and so far, only player to be 100% unanimous. That's just ridiculous. The guy averaged, what, 60-70 innings a year? The Yankees were so strong in 1996-2000 that they would have won titles anyway even without Rivera. He wasn't even the closer in 1996. I remember him mainly for his 2 biggest failures: Blowing the 2001 World Series, then the 2004 ALCS.
Carlos Delgado. Somehow forgotten. I don't understand it. 473 HR's, .920 OPS. I don't care if his defense was nothing special.
44 WAR simply isn’t going to cut
@@nerothelost9605 WAR isn’t the end all be all. I understand it can be accurate, but at the end of the day it’s a hypothetical stat. Concrete stats are more important because they illustrate the actual output of a player.
@@wm_9640 Plus the context tends to be connected to the quality of the team as well. Yet people overanalyze WAR to the point it felt like a fetish.
Delgado needed 500 hrs with a low war
@@gators-rock-tim-t9247 It was a good thing Dave Kingman's career ended before he got there, otherwise that number's status as a auto ticket would have been ruined long before the PEDs issues got out of control.
Few people mention Steve Garvey in discussions such as these. Ten-time all-star, a league MVP with MVP votes in nine seasons, and four gold gloves. He was one of the most well-known players of his era.
@@toddsmith5715 38 career WAR. No. Nor Fred Lynn.
As others have mentioned Keith Hernandez played in the same era and was a much better player by most metrics
@@DanielSong39 That he was.
@@DanielSong39 anytime someone used all star appearances as their argument, you know that person is a moron.
@@toddsmith5715 One thing that's clear to me is that there are a lot of great, memorable players who are not in the Hall of Fame
No one is saying that Garvey wasn't a stud, he clearly was
I don't think the Hall of Fame would be watered down if it had 500-1000 players for example but that's a matter of opinion
Jeff Kent the worst snub ever !!! 290 career batting average ! 377 hrs !! 1518 rbis !! 2461 hits ! Show me another second baseman with those numbers ! Almost forgot won an MVP in the height of the steroid era !
And he was a teammate of Bonds. I feel he would have had more MVP love had he not been overshadowed by Bonds.
@@sirekumasutra7022 it’s just hard to believe that a second baseman with those numbers is not in the Hall of Fame. I believe he has the best numbers of any second baseman ever.
@@sirekumasutra7022he won an MVP because of the protection Bonds gave him
@@jamesonrapp281 It also doesn't help that his career before that while decent was also nothing mind blowing. I wouldn't be surprised if it led to some people thinking he may be juicing.
Whitaker should get in before Kent. 51st in WAR amongst all players, 10th ranked 2B, all nine above & below him are in the HOF
Fans should NOT Vote for the HOF. Most fans go for Popularity!
The hall would be filled with big market players. Look at the AS voting, it's a joke. Fans voting for HoF is a terrible idea.
Kenny Loften for me, absolute nightmare on the base pads. Robbing people in centerfield. He just did everything well.
*Selfish. Clubhouse Cancer. Oh, It's Base Paths, Not"Pads".*
@@rUsHiSm
I kinda like 'on the base pads'. I might start using this as well. Just to annoy the too- tightly-starched, conservative, old-timey traditions preservers.
Kenny Lofton and Lou Whitaker are the two most obvious omissions, I really don't get. Both were respected and beloved by their peers, as well as fans. Not a good look for Cooperstown to have them excluded. Veterans committee needs to fix this ASAP.
Amen. Lofton was a KEY part of the most potent offense and one of the best teams (the Indians) in the late 90s. And his defense was Gold Glove level. He should be in.
One of my all time favorites
Dale Murphy needs to be in the Hall too
As much as I would love to see Murph in his batting average and WAR average hurts him
Dale needs to be in. WAR is not the best system. Cal ripken has a better war than tony gwynn and chipper jones. Ripken had.276 BA and Strikeout 1309 times. Gwynn had 69.2 but cal had 90.5 WAR. WAR does not work.
Two time back to back NL MVP. I agree he should be in the hall.
I absolutely agree with you regarding how players are chosen for the HoF. Boycotting the steroid era players out of spite is a solid example of how ludicrous the current system is. And, your explanation of why there are numerous selection methods other than the Baseball Writers is spot on correct. We definitely need better selection criteria and a better selection process, but who is going to make those changes? Who has the power and the authority to make those decisions? I think this is a classic Catch 22 situation akin to expecting Congress to pass a budget on time.
MLB, League Presidents, HOFers, on and on
Curt Schilling is not in simply because of his politics. The guys was the ultimate gamer, regardless of his opinions.
Being evil is not is not politcal. The players in the Hall represent the image also.
Mister hustle is not in. Rose even had a(tolerable) personality.
@@kennethpeterson4068 “evil” is an interesting standard. There are many evil bastards in the Hall, and if you disagree, you have no business in this conversation.
But you think Curt is especially evil? Why? Did he kill someone? I know he made a big error in revealing Tim Wakefield’s news…but is that SO evil that he should not be honored in the Hall?
Who else is too “evil” in your mind?
Curt Schilling absolutely belongs in the Hall of Fame, no question whatsoever.
The man defrauded an entire state out of 10s of millions of dollars and then went on to be very loud and vocal about his very hateful opinions. Unfortunately for Curt, in the year 2024, people try not to give recognition to garbage people regardless of what they have accomplished. Curt forgot to human beings get to decide who gets remembered, be mad at him for destroying his own legacy.
@@kennethpeterson4068 😂😂😂 Evil??? Please…..Enlighten us as to why….
Sorry but I don’t think Lincecum is a Hall of Famer. He had a couple GREAT seasons and some very good ones but that’s not enough. If a guy like King Felix doesn’t get a lot of votes and was better for longer than no hope for Timmy.
Naming lincecum as one of his 3 big omissions really just ruined this entire video and made me question his baseball knowledge big time
@@adamalexander3963 bro you’re not wrong at all🤣the MLB is not the NBA. He should’ve stuck to guys like Sweet Lou and Pete Rose if he really wanted to make a case. Hell make the whole video about Billy Wagner but cmon not Timmy
@@adamalexander3963 Same here. It's not even debatable. He had three good seasons, and one other pretty decent season. Not even on the bubble.
Tim's peak was on such a higher level than Felix's. I got nothing but respect for King Felix but The Freak was on another level.
@@andrem.thomas332 not really, he had 2 hof tier seasons. need a peak of 4-5 like koufax. and timmyjim is my favorite pitcher
It’s the hall of fame, not the hall of ethics.
writers gotta take their personal issues with players out of the equation
I agree, but I also don't think it is a bad thing to keep some people out based on them being just terrible people. Like, lets say Wander Franco had the career we all thought he might have, and then after retirement, but before he was up for induction, the news about him being a scumbag came out. Don't you agree that the hall of fame should not let him in?
On the other hand, despite thinking Schilling is an ass, he shouldn't be kept out just because he's an ass.
Kirby Puckett got in so there you go
Writers tend to be inconsistent and hypocritical about these things
@@snerdterguson I think it’s unlikely that he’d be the only one in Cooperstown. I think what he did is despicable, but baseball also dealt with it long before the hall of fame became an issue.
@@DanielSong39 Even more- the very first class had Ty Cobb; even if it's claimed most of the POS stories were a biased biographer, there's claims Cobb threw at least one game.
This was such a great video.
Changes surely need to be made to the HOF system.
Lou Whitaker not being a hall of famer is ludicrous
Agreed.
Especially since his SS made it in with comparable numbers. Alan Trammel
@@ronaldmanuel732 Oh, I agree, and Mr. Trammel does, too. Of that, I am sure! They need to change a few rules for the Baseball HOF! Phil Rizzuto gets in, but Dave Concepcion doesn't with FAR better numbers???
@usaveteran-retired6464 Absolutely! Concepcion was ahead of his time and got those numbers against some great pitching. Thank you for your service. 🫡
@@usaveteran-retired6464 Alan Trammel is in the HOF, though he wasn't voted in by the writers. How do you figure that Dave Concepcion has FAR better numbers than Phil Rizzuto? Rizzuto had a higher lifetime batting average, OPS and OPS+. Their career WAR is basically the same, but Concepcion played more seasons, and Rizzuto lost his age 25, 26 and 27 seasons to service in World War 2.
There is no way Tim Lincecum had a long enough peak to be considered for the HOF. Yes he was absolutely fantastic for a few seasons but it wasn’t long enough
There’s still a lot of recency bias when it comes Lincecum. Most of the guys who run these baseball channels “grew up” watching him so they have that weird nostalgia. When comparing him to pitchers of past eras who had great peaks but didn’t make the hall of fame(Fernando Valenzuela, Rick Sutcliffe, Mike Scott) he doesn’t even stack up to them.
@@joshdelagarza231 There was a 3 year stretch or so where Lincecum was an absolute beast but you are correct with your assessment. I remember Fernandomania. Dwight Gooden had a longer peak as well.
All these guys need to do is look at the stats. It’s more than obvious Tim wasn’t good for long enough
@@joshdelagarza231 His 4 year peak is a top three stretch in MLB history statistically. But I agree his career was cut too short to make the hall.
If they won’t let Johan Santana in, Tim ain’t getting in
@@joshdelagarza231 He was no Sandy Koufax. Black Ink tells as much.
If Harold Baines can get in, the barrier for entry is clearly not the holdup.
Also, Big Time Timmy Jim is definitely Hall of Very Good, but I don’t know if he belongs in Cooperstown.
The HOF disgraced itself when they let Harold baines in. Been hard to take it seriously since then
THANK YOU! If I have to argue about the Mattingly vs Puckett stats being within 1% of each stat different between the two I think I'll have an aneurysm
It makes absolutely no sense
@@JabroniBaseball I can put down the numbers next to each other and no one can tell the difference haha. Which player had 2 more doubles or 3 less RBI haha
The fact that TJ Quinn mentions Eddie Murphy's name being brought up alongside Albert Belle as players that writers wanted to punish is ridiculous. I love that Murray who was burned by the press early on, he then refused to talk to them ever after, put up such enormous career numbers that they didn't dare leave him off their ballots.
Murray didn't behave in the way that Albert Belle did, he simply felt that reporters had lied about his family members and refused to grant interviews after that. Murray never had a single off field incident in his career and all of his teammates especially Cal ripken loved him, so for reporters to bring up his name as one they can't wait to leave off the ballot shows how disgusting and petty these "writers" can be. Murray even alluded to this in his Hall of Fame speech.
I loved him on Saturday Night Live and Beverley Hills Cop. One of the all-time great comedians.
@@jimwerther
Yup ...he could really ball it when the lights were on.
I wish he had won an Oscar but what can you do? Doesn't help that he did Norbit.
@@aVerveQuest Eddie Murray. Moron.
Albert Belle deserves to be in.
Mandating that each ballot contain 10 votes is ludicrous. What if the member honestly does not think there are 10 worthy candidates. I like the idea of allowing as many selections as desired much better. This way nobody has to not-vote for a sure-fire candidate in order to spare another from dropping off.
it's a terrible idea.
They don’t have to vote for ten unless it was changed, ten is the maximum. To address your second point, there are never more than ten sure fire shoe-in HOFers, usually only one or two.
Terrible idea
To quote: "my top four players who should absolutely be in the HoF."
Jabroni Baseball listed:
1 -- Keith Hernandez
-------- Oh yeah, most definitely.
2 -- Don Mattingly
-------- Hernandez first, then we can talk about Mattingly.
3. -- Lou Whitaker
-------- Stats do not help him much, big accumulator. Great dWAR for his era, prolly the leader among 2Bs. Not a lot of peer recognition via AS games. If Trammel deserves to be there, Whitaker should be there as well.
4 -- Tim Lincecum
-------- If your Hall values 'peak value' strongly ...then yeah, put him in.
-------- If your Hall values 'career value' strongly ...prolly a pass.
-------- Four great HoF-level seasons, and a string of OK to mediocre seasons to string out his career.
Just one viewer's opinions.
Dale Murphy
Fred McGriff
Don Mattingly
Should all be in. Donnie Baseball was literally a face if not the face of baseball from 85 to 90. And was statistically the best player in baseball in the late 80s.
Mattingly is extremely borderline. I would not vote for him but if he was elected I would not view it as some sort of outrage. He was the best player in the AL over a four year stretch.
@@BriggsSeekins LMAO, Donnie Baseball had way better stats than Murphy and Mcgriff did if u take the best 10 yrs of their career just not in HRs. And Donnie played in the harder American League with better batting comp. than the national League just had 1 good hitter Tony G. Murphy is a career 265 hitter!
@@joeblood1050 I was very happy when Fred McGriff was put in!
10 Year Peaks
WAR Avg. OBP SLG HR
Mattingly 4.0 .310 .361 .479 22
Olerud 4.8 .305 .411 .484 20
Beltran 5.6 .285 .367 .510 29
B. Williams 4.9 .312 .395 .507 25
D. Parker 4.1 .305 .354 .496 23
A. Belle 4.0 .298 .373 .570 41
Hernandez 5.1 .303 .394 .448 13
Even going on 10 year peak and not career, if Mattingly deserves it, then there are sure a lot of other players that do too...
McGriff did get in
I 100% disagree with use all ten or lose your ability to vote. There are ballots where ten are absolutely not worthy of being in the Hall. Forcing people to vote for ten turns into the Hall of Very Good and not the Hall of Fame. There are already too many questionable players in it let's not make it even worse. Of the four you say absolutely should be in I would only agree with one. That is Whitaker.
Stealing popcorn from the kid is keeping Mattingly out.
Oh, and he once took a leak in Kansas City. The bastard!
Tim lincecum was really good in those few years but he shouldn’t be in the hall. Which a career war of 20 that’s way too low. His career was way too short.
10 is a ridiculous number considering there’s a lot more baseball players then in the 1930s
I can’t believe this hasn’t changed at all in close to 100 years
WOW. That's an important point I missed.
Even though there are nearly twice as many teams and almost 2.5 times as many players (assuming 20 men on a roster back in the 40s), I don't think the number of superstars and Hall of Fame caliber players nearly doubled. Presumably, they are more spread out instead of the Yankees having so many.
And it's not just the greater number of teams, it's the fact that a starting lineup is 10 players now thanks to the DH, and we have a 5-man starting pitcher rotation vs. the 3-man rotation in the 1930s.
It’s not absurd
Dave Parker has more Home Runs RBI Hits ,Runs Total Bases,By a large margin over Mattingly and Keith Hernandez. Dave leads Hsll of Famer Jim Rice in almost every hitting category except Home Runs. When Rice was elected Parker only received about 10% of the vote. Parker also leads in Put Outs and Assists. Parker played most of his home games at hitter unfriendly Riverfront and Three Rivers Stadiums. Rice played all of his home games at Fenway Park.
He also was worse than all of them
@@justinyo1796 How was Dave Parker worse than Mattingly,Hernandez ,Steve Garvey,your facts???
Three Rivers and Riverfront were hitter friendly parks.
Only Wrigley (with the wind blowing out) and the Braves park were friendlier.
Astrodome , Dodger Stadium , Busch Stadium, Olympic Stadium, Candlestick , and Shea were pitcher friendly parks in the NL in that era.
@@robertmurdock1848 Are you in fantasyland?? Fenway Park is as hitter friendly for a Right Handed Pull Hitter as you can get. Routine 310 ‘ Fly balls go for HRs. Routine outs at Three Rivers and Riverfront. Johnny Vench would have averaged 40-45 HRs a year at Fenway. Parker still managed 339 And leads Rice in all other offensive categories RBIs ,Hits ,Runs,Total Bases.
@@buddyvilla7393
That must explain why the top 3 HR hitters in Sox history are left handers.
I'm disputing your description of Riverfront and Three Rivers as hitter unfriendly, they were the opposite.
Joe Morgan went from a peak of 15 homers and an average of 10 in Houston, to nearly double that in Cincy.
There's a reason Cincinnati's only CY winner came in the shortened COVID season, their ballparks have been very hitter friendly since the days of Crosley Field.
Doc gooden is much more deserving of the hall than Tim Lincecum. Doc was much more dominant in his peak. Maybe had the best season in MLB history in 1985. He could easily have won the Cy young in his rookie season as well. His overall numbers are better than Lincecum too.
Flash in the pan. He never approached those first few years, again.
@@paulc7486 So was Lincecum.
Amazing video! I’m amazed that all those people you mentioned aren’t in. Hearing about this makes me sad I no longer have the pictures I took when I went to Cooperstown when I was 12(2008)
I agree with a lot of this but the steroid thing is bothersome to me. The record books were ruined in my opinion during this era. I am also not a fan of someone like Bonds and ARod who cooked their entire careers getting the accolades they have. I don't have an answer that is satisfactory.
Tim Lincecum is NOT a HOFer. He had 4 STELLAR years and 6 AWFUL years! He has a career 1.29 WHIP that is NOT HOF.
That's literally what I was thinking! A bright star, but burned out quickly.
Complete crime that Bobby Abreu and Larry Walker weren't on this list.
@@devinrose7918 Larry Walker is in the HOF
Agreed. I saw Lincecum pitch when he had the stuff. It was amazing. I've seen Maddux pitch, (in multiple decades) and Lincecum was every bit as good. But like you point out, 4 STELLAR and 6 AWFUL seasons.
@@JeffreyJetsKohut Well don't listen to me! I'm on RUclips not the front office!
indeed. lots of guys had other-worldly peaks for a few years. is Ryan Howard a HOFer too?
if a person gets in on the 8th ballot, it doesn't mean they should have gotten in earlier. It means that in those earlier years, there was probably people more deserving to go in. Maybe the voters only voted a handful of people and hadn't really looked into a players numbers.
You’re spot on with that. I was more so talking about the voters who didn’t vote for a player on ballots 1-6 for example, while also not using all 10 of their votes. But then on ballots 7 voting for a player all of a sudden
Fernando Valenzuela & Orel Hershiser should be in the Hall of Fame. They were awesome in the ‘80s.
I recently moved near Cooperstown and visited the Hall of Fame 1st chance I got and I was surprised at the amount of Fernando Valenzuela related items and stats on display, yet he’s not in the Hall of Fame. That’s a shame.
He won't make it. But he had a good career.
These writers need to get over themselves. The whole "steroid era" pretty much saved baseball after the strike. Everyone turned a blind eye to it when Bonds, Sosa and McGuire were going at it. Once they served their purpose, that's when everything came out.
Also, I've been a lifelong Donny Baseball fan boy. I'd like to see him in.
And Pete Rose. And Joe Jackson.
The fact that they put Selig in there is a blow to their credibility especially.
Not everyone turned a blind eye....
Great comment. It makes me sick that Bud Selig is enshrined in Cooperstown, while Barry Bonds is not.
@@KidFresh71Selig wasn't voted in by the writers, but by the veterans committee, which is made up of former players & executives
@@jerryharrison1946 Doesn't make it better though.
I still laugh that of all the people they could have voted in unanimously, it was a closer. I mean, really?
Read this with a nice tone, cause I’m not being a wise guy. I think if anyone, like me, grew up in the 80’s, you didn’t hear a lot at all about Lou and Keith. They always seemed like decent players, but secondary to other dudes. They’re good, but like, Jack Morris good, and he shouldn’t be in.
I think that speaks more about the media than their baseball ability
Keith actually did get some press in his prime, he won an MVP and several Gold Gloves
I enjoyed this video immensely, I agreed with a lot you had to say, not everything, but most points. The one suggestion I really disagree with is the suggestion of letting fans vote for who gets in. If you think the writers have a particular bias against certain players, it would be far worse if the fans were allowed to vote. Keep up the great work, I enjoy your videos!!!
Glad you enjoyed it! These videos are a lot of fun to make. I can absolutely agree with you on the fan voting. If that was ever allowed, I wouldn’t let it be more that 5% of the vote while the other 95% goes to professionals on and off the field. That way we don’t run into fan bias and ballot stuffing.
Dale Murphy needs to get in. Two-time MVP and 5-time GG winner in the '80s. Every one of his peers will tell you he deserves it. Plus he did it the right way w/o any hint of impropriety. Its a shame.
Mattingly and Murphy is the 2 names i hear the most, If Murphy had a 280 BA he would already be in, the career 265 BA is what's keeping him out from what i hear.
Albert Belle over Murphy.
He was good for 6 years
Every metric says Edmonds was a much better player for example
@@blakecscott5525 The Hall is too exclusive to get in. Two time MVP in a single decade should be in. Period. Full stop. If Murph doesn't get in then Bonds, Big Mac, Rose etc. can all rot as far as I am concerned. They broke rules simple as that.
@@atlfan48 So Juan Gonzalez and Roger Maris too? I disagree...
Was on board the whole way and then saw your snubs and was on board EVEN MORE. Totally agree! Well said. Thank you for posting.
4:36 it's Grover Cleveland Alexander, not Cy Young
I 100% agree it needs a overhaul. There's some other players as well i would like to be looked at as also. Like Alfonso Soriano and Gary Sheffield. I agree with Kenny Lofton, Don Mattingly, and Keith Hernadez being looked at as well. And i know that the war stat likes to be used. As a measurement, for players. But that's one stat i'm not a fan of. Because there's been a lot of mvp winners that didn't have a high war stat. Doesn't mean they weren't a good player. That's why i don't hold that stat in high regard, as some do. I also want to add, there is another system i'm not in favor of. With the curren era and such. And that is the 5 man rotation and at this rate there will be a 6 man rotation. I really believe that will hurt baseball, more then it actually helps. Injuries are apart of any sport. There's no way to eliminate all injuries in any sport. So i think it makes things even worse, by babying players in any sport.
Curt Schilling should be there sitting at 79.5WAR. Broke so many records. 216 wins with career ERA of 3.46, 3 World Championships a 11-2 record in post season. 5 make it or go home games wining 4 of them and his team wining all five. Bloody sock game. Had multiple seasons of 300 strikeout seasons and only dident win a cy young cause he was paired up with the big unit in his prime. Co world series MVP 2001. Championship series 1993. Multiple allstar appearances. Having the best first half a season out of anybody in 2002. Also Randy and Curt was the first pair to both make 300 strikeouts in a season on the same team same year 2002. dude is a legend 20 seasons went out on top with a world series win in game 2 in 2007.
Fan voting for the HoF would be a terrible idea as the lack of in depth knowledge, the overly emotional tendencies of many who vote, and the short term thinking of the average American would negatively impact an already questionable system for voting in new members. Maybe a coin flip with the best two out of three being the deciding factor.
Plus I can see 4chan exploiting it.
Funny how Bud selig had a higher vote pct than Eddie Murray
Yeah it's a freaking joke that it happened.
Sickening.He was reinsdorf's toady the last 20 yrs.
Fantastic video. I would agree with all of your choices that should be in the hall, however, I am a bit disappointed that you did not mention Thurman Munson. Avg, number of games caught, caught stealing percentage compared to the yearly average, and postseason are enough to have him waltz in to the hall.
Tim Lincecum? A Hall of Famer? You might as well put in Brandon Webb and Jake Peavy at that point. All 3 of them had fantastic peaks in the 2000s but got crippled with injuries. Tbh I wouldn't put any of them in the Hall.
Honestly I wouldn't be opposed to putting in some players that had insane peaks.
Koufax has a short career which ended with injury.
@@rumblehat4357 his peak was far better and lasted longer than Lincecum
@@shoukatsukaiI’m just pointing out lack of longevity wasn’t an excuse for Koufax not getting in. There doesn’t seem to be an actual standard set of stats, just opinions of sportswriters (who COULD be biased.)
@@rumblehat4357 I agree with the lack of standardized rules on what really makes a Hall of Famer makes it a joke. It's just that comparing Lincecum with Koufax doesn't warrant a discussion bc one was far and away a better player and earned a Hall of Fame spot.
Thanks for mentioning Keith Hernandez. He belongs in the HOF.
Given the attitudes of SOME members of the BBWAA, it is no wonder Ted Williams had such a sour attitude toward the press. And, of course, Ted is one of perhaps 50-100 players all-time who, in the minds of most serious followers of The Game, are AUTOMATIC selections.
Williams is probably a top 3 hitter of all time and among the top 20 or so players
A group of just HOF players that vote on player(s) that they think should inducted beside them.
Might be one player per year from this group, or possible % if your going to allow more than one player to be inducted Who else is more qualified to deside who should be in the HOF, then the players that played and have already been inducted already.
I’m definitely pro “Small Hall.” Should be reserved for the greatest of the greatest. Not very good or even great, but legendary. The players that pass the eye test and you just know are heads and shoulders above everyone else. Hard to explain but I feel like people just know it when they see it. Letting anybody and everybody is what’s turned the Naismith into a joke and even the Pro Football Hall of Fame has gotten way too generous over the years. I have no issue going years without any new members if no one is truly deserving. Don’t just put somebody in just to say you did.
Completely agree... I think this guy wants to transform it into the Hall of Good Players
@@bishopthefoolTo be fair the Good Players are elite athletes making a lot of money
Even playing 10 years in MLB and retiring with 20 WAR and >$10M in the bank is extremely impressive to Average Joes like us
@@DanielSong39 indeed, but the Hall of Fame is for the elite of the elite
I keep seeing Lincecum being compared to Sandy Koufax because Koufax had a relatively short prime. I don't see it. Lincecum's HoF candidacy rests on only two seasons, 08 and 09, and his WAR is under 20. Koufax, short as his prime was, put in six straight HoF-worthy seasons including a four-year run with a 1.86 ERA and 0.91 WHIP. That's legendary dominance.
If you want a legit comparison, Lincecum fans would be better off pointing to Dizzy Dean. Another ace with a short prime. He still had five HoF seasons and was the ace of one of the most memorable teams in history, so he still has a better case than Lincecum, but he was nowhere near as masterful as Koufax and probably got into Cooperstown more because of his personality than his legit accolades.
But even lowering the bar to the Dizzy Dean standard, Lincecum is still probably coming up short.
I agree with your changes to voting process. Expand the voter pool. Remove the cap on number of players a voter can select all make sense. However, you can't mandate making the voters select a certain number of players as their work around would be to vote for very undeserving candidates as a protest.
I don't disagree with your annoyance over how the voters have handled the PED issue, but to be fair to them it's a complicated issue. Not sure how you can have a Hall of Fame without Bonds, Clemens or Rodriguez, but there's something about Rafael Palmeiro getting in that seems wrong. So there's a line somewhere not sure where, but it does exist. I also think it's entirely fair for a voter to withhold a vote from a player that despite any evidence used PED's (if that's a dealbreaker for you). This isn't a court of law. No one is being sent to jail. We are deciding which great players get an extra honor. So pretty much anything outside of a petty, personal grievance seems entirely in bounds as long as one is consistent with it.
My advice to is to avoid getting worked up about a HOF candidate's election %. Who cares if one player gets in with 81.4% and another guy gets in with 86.7%? It doesn't tell you anything about their career or impact in the game. Be happy when your favorite players get in and move on. Focusing on this will only make you upset.
As to your list of HOF snubs at the end, with the exception of Lou Whitaker they are all a No for me. Simple reason that for each one you named, there a 4 others who have just as good a resume as the player you chose. Keep in mind I had a Don Mattingly poster in my room as a kid and I named my dog Matty in honor of him, so I don't need anyone to explain how amazing he was at his peak. The problem is that he did hurt his back, and post 1988 he was a good, but not great player for half a decade and then hung them up. How do you select him for example, but not Will Clark or Magglio Ordonez who both posted very similar (if not better) stats?
As to Tim Lincecum, I don't even know what to say. Yes, he was dominant for 2 or 3 seasons and then got hurt. That's a pretty common story. How does Tim Lincecum earn a selection over Johan Santana, Dwight Gooden, Fernando Valenzuela, Vida Blue, Sam McDowell, Ron Guidy or Luis Tiant Jr. who all have far better career numbers and seasons of dominance? Heck even Jose Rijo's peak (67-39 149 ERA+) was as good as Tim's (62-36 143 ERA+).
I’m here to give Dale Murphy some love.
Murphy and Mattingly are the 2 name most mention on this topic. Murphy's BA is what's keeping him out, 265!
I always thought Johan Santana should've been a Hall of Famer. Like Tim Lincecum and Sandy Koufax, his peak was short due to injuries, but his peak is absolutely Hall of Fame worthy.
What about Fernando Valenzuela ? Do you think he should get over in over lincicum or even hersheisher
In addition to lowering the percentage needed to get in and uncapping the number of votes, I also don't think anyone should ever be taken out of contention, either because of time or low percentages. Perceptions can change.
Can't say I disagree with you at all on that. If perceptions can change, let people stay indefinitely on the ballots especially since they passed the committee to get on to begin with
People aren't taken out of contention; they move to the Veterans' Committee.
@@whackedoutwrestlingpodcast1404 True but that is a whole separate process and only meats every few years.
@@atticusshadowmore3263 Meets.
Some more snubs.... Steve Garvey, Al Oliver, Bill Madlock. I believe the last two guys had a career average over .300..
Tim Lincecum was a God to me. As a young Giants fan growing up in the early 2000s, he absolutely CAPTIVATED not just Giants fans but even those of the opposing teams. The amount of presence he had whenever he stepped on the mound was nothing short of mind boggling. I remember being at the game where he was presented with his second Cy Young Award, and 10 year old me was thinking to myself that he just HAD to be in the hall, because it just didn't make sense to me how anyone could just be that good and not be hall of fame worthy. All these years later, and I knew he most likely wouldn't make the hall due to his injuries, but I still feel like the sheer and utter dominance he held for those years just needs to be acknowledged.
I couldn't agree more with you. I'm a Mets fan and I tried to catch every single Lincecum start I could. I know a lot of other fans of other teams that felt the same way. The dude defined what an ace was for a generation
@@JabroniBaseball He's such a fascinating person with an equally fascinating career, and I've even been greatly considering making a huge video on my own channel all about his rise and eventual fall, because there's so much more to his story that most people don't know, and it's a story that people need to hear
The Hall of Fame is a museum. Go to the Hall of Fame. You will undoubtedly see something pertaining to Tim Lincecum.
Did he have 2 outstanding years in 08 and 09…..Yes.
Do those 2 years make him a Hall of Famer……Hell no.
Tim Lincecum played 10 years. First half was good. Second half was shit. It’s happened to PLENTY of players throughout baseball history.
@@prestonbucher18hes more of a hall of Famer than harold baines.
Tigers fan here!
I hate Lincecum! But yeah, he should be in 💯
I am only halfway through the video and have to say well done. It was very informative to say the least. You forced me subscribe. Keep up the good work.
Tim lincecum is not a hall of famer dude lol, and Dave Parker is by far the biggest omission out there.
2B is a great microcosm of the problem with not only Lou Whitaker but Bobby grich and Jeff Kent all being left out
Willie Randolph
The writers should have lost all privileges to vote on any award after what they did to Albert Belle
I’ve clearly forgot about Albert Belle.
There is no doubt that Albert Belle deserve to be in the Hall of Fame.. including guys like Barry Bonds, Roger Clemmons, Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Pete Rose , Dick Allen and Joe Jackson will deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. The writers have no business to vote.. especially wasting everybody’s time they didn’t have the guts to vote these guys in the hall…
This is absolutely murder .
I agree with most of what you say... But players who 100% used steroids and it made them huge stars such as bonds, A-rod, and others... They definitely don't deserve to be in the HoF with or without an asterisk.
That said... Keeping players out because they played during the era is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Crazy to me someone like Mattingly isn't in either.
Bonds never actually failed a steroid test after the rule was implemented. In a weird way Bonds never actually cheated lol he just lied to congress.
I think that's a fair POV to have. Its a pretty divided topic so that's why I think its a good idea to have different opinions in the voting process and let these players in or keep them out depending on the weight of the collective votes.
Keith Hernandez is way too pushy, such as the time he asked Jerry to help him move, after only having known Jerry for a few weeks. But in all seriousness, Piazza's "bacne" is infamous, he's a known roider.
and a cocaine snooter as well
@@HaveCheetahWillView Hey, guess what we are talking about baseball not your neighbor or that uncle you can't stand. lighten up both of you
Then there's Papi who was caught using roids and got voted in anyway.
He also stinks in the broadcast booth, hard to listen to his voice.
I enjoyed your presentation and admire the obvious preparation. We generally disagree, which is ok, but you've made good points. Recency bias is a big problem, and the PEDs. Most important, as you noted, are better/clearer guidelines for voters.
Andruw Jones would like a word about HOF snubs
Tim maximized his time during an era when teams did not protect players as much against high pitch counts. You're talking about an already undersized pitcher with an extremely high work rate. He was always going to burn out fast, but he put up career numbers in his first handful of years. If you give your body to the game and are one of the best at it, you deserve your place in the Hall.
And yet, disregarding the big 3: Bonds, Clemens, and ARod whose complaints are very specific, the Hall has more of a problem letting in undeserving players than it does keeping deserving players out. Ted Simmons, Harold Baines, Jack Morris, Tony Perez, Bill Mazeroski, Gil Hodges, Jim Kaat and more don't have hall of fame stats-- not in WAR and not in flat stats. I can name 10 guys that are more deserving... not that I'm advocating for them either-- the bar should go up, not sideways. It is good that the Hall is overly selective. It is good that Hall voters have high criticism. It's even good that personal biases are gatekeepers-- that won't last forever, and by the time they're gone, only the greatest will be considered. When Garvey, Murphy, and Mattingly (all of whom have an average WAR well under 4) start getting in, the Hall will suffer. Sure, Bonds, Clemens, ARod, and probably Sosa, Mcgwire and Palmeiro were great enough to get in, but we all understand why they aren't... You can't trust their stats. If they really deserve it like Bonds and Clemens, they will get in when the controversy has fizzled out.
Best comment on here
No argument with your HOF selections except Lincecum. There are just TOO many forgotten greats who won twice as many games, frequently contributing to the game for decades afterward than to honor one who was dominant for 3 seasons. And in 4 of his bare minimum 10 seasons he posted a sub .500 winning percentage!
Votes need to be taken seriously. It is disgraceful that voters will not vote for someone because they think no one should be unanimous or should get in on their first year of eligibility. I absolutely hate this reasoning. It is also absurd that players are left off the ballot for egotistical reasons, like they were mean to reporters or hurt someone's feelings on social media. It is also strange that vote percentages will start at 5% and then go to to 75% after 10 years. What did those players do in those years to improve their candidacy. They are either a hall of famer or not so take it seriously. I have been to the hall in Cooperstown twice and thought it was an interesting experience however.
Absolutely spot on. Zero accountability from the writers who just want to troll and preserve writers legacies vs what they should be focusing on. Does this player deserve to be in the hall of fame? yes or no? They're making it way more complicated than it has to be and its destroying the credibility of the hall
The prolem with "vote percentages start at 5% and go up to 75%" is it doesn't account for bumper crop years, especially with the "voters MUST vote for 10 people even if there's not 10 candidates they think are HOF-worthy" that was said in the video. Even then, I'd add a little more complication for a good reason:
Originally, players got 15 years on the ballot, not 10. My logic is take a rule from the Wrestling Observer HOF's rules for staying on the ballot (75% to get into the Hall, but if you have been on the ballot for 10 years and received more than 50% of the ballot in the tenth year, you remain on the ballot) for up to five years- but the standard goes up 5% every year for those (11 year needs 55%, 12 needs 60%, 13 needs 65%, 14 needs 70%, and finally year 15 is all or nothing, you either get in at 75% or you're off.)
have to be a yankee to get in the first time biggio and jeters stats mirror each other but guess who got in first
@@vincenthammons-kd9du Same as it ever was, Ted Williams in 1941, outhit DiMaggio during his 56 game streak.
DiMaggio’s OPS through the streak was 1.181, Williams’s OPS during the streak was 1.224, of course that was a minor slump for Ted that season where he finished with a 1.287 OPS.
DiMaggio sold more papers though, so despite being ahead of Ted in only one offensive category, RBIs with 125 to Ted's 120, with Ted having 85 fewer at bats mind you, at the rate he was producing he would have reached 142 with DiMaggio's AB volume, Dimaggio received nearly double the 1st place MVP votes.
So yeah, GFY if you're not in the pinstripes.
@@zym6687 That one is actually defensible since DiMaggio was much much better with the glove
I knew Tim Lincecum never had a shot at the HOF. Baseball HOF voters put more weight on longevity than they do in the other major sports leagues. His body, specifically his hip, just couldn't hold up with his extraordinary pitching stride and delivery. Once injuries caught up with him, he was toast. It was tough seeing his body give out the way it did, because he was absolutely dominant and a lot of fun to watch early in his career. There were flashes of his past greatness in some of those 5 subpar seasons including another no-hitter and World Series championships.
Even with his career cut short by injuries, he made more of an impact on the game and the story of baseball than several players who are currently in the HOF. Maybe they can open "Timmy's Dispensary" in Cooperstown...
No.
@@Iamhungey Yes.
@@seanm5258 His numbers fell way short, his peak doesn't come close to making up for it unfortunately.
Don't agree with Lincecum but Hernandez, Mattingly, Dave Parker, Whitaker and Dale Murphy should be in meanwhile... Harold Baines? WTH?
I'm still confused as to why Hernandez, Whitaker, Murphy, and Mattingly aren't in.
I agree with you on the guys who should be in but why does it seem to bother people that Harold Baines is in? Did wrong people in a former life? Does it have an adverse affect on your life? The HoF is a celebration of baseball and apparently there were enough people who wanted to celebrate Baines career if you don't that of course is your right and just walk right past his plaque and for get about it, and then really start helping the push to get others who should have been elected in so it can be a true celebration in stead of a controversy
@@moderndaysalvage3976what did harold Haines accomplish in his career to warrant the hall? Hes the batters version of Jamie Moyer.....is Jamie moyer a hall of famer in your book?
@@johnwayne9828 Harold Baines is such a weird outlier in such a strict HOF. He didn't even get to 40 WAR. I agree with you. Baines was a very good player, but not a HOF'er. He's as they say, the Hall of Very Good.
@@msscott22 I'll be honest, I'm not even a fan of using war to judge a player for the hall. After seeing a video saying brian giles should be a hall of famer because he had 50 war, I dont trust war to tell me who is and isnt hall worthy. But Baines got in purely off of longevity and counting stats because he played over 2 decades. If that's how the halls gonna go it, jamie moyer better get his speech ready.
I would have the same system for picking worthy players and have season tickets holders vote with the only rule is that you can’t vote in players best known or spent the most time of their playing career playing for your team, so a Cubs fan can’t vote for a player who played 15 seasons and spent 12 of them with the Chicago Cubs. You vote for any other player eligible from the other 29 teams otherwise the season ticket holder might only vote their teams players who are eligible. I would also make the rule that you must have held a season ticket package for 5 seasons in a row and be 30 years old or older and you would have 5 ballots and your done.
What if ten players on the ballot aren’t worthy of the hall of fame, they still have to pick ten no matter what!?
You can leave your ballot blank if you wish.
If the injustice of Lou Whitaker’s exclusion isn’t front and center than this video is total bs.
Babe Ruth 95.1% Ha! How can they be taken seriously?
Makes absolutely no sense
@@JabroniBaseball Not only that, but the votes method is also kind of bullshit in many other ways. When Jackie Robinson only made the HOF by four votes, that should say why the vote totals should not be rendered holy figures.
Who else was on the ballot.
It was the first HOF ballot, the mother of logjams.
@@luddite4change449 everyone it was the first ballot.
I was at the National Baseball Hall Of Fame and Museum yesterday. It is an absolutely fabulous place.
What makes you think pitchers are more talented now? Velocity? Spin rate? I would argue that pitchers not being able to go deep into games and a reliance on the strikeout makes them LESS talented. They have less to worry about. Less workload. More rest...and yet, they can't stay healthy because they try to throw every pitch at max velocity. That doesn't make them better.
The DH as well.
Velocity makes hitters less effective, so yes.
@@dash_r_media No. It doesn't. Location makes hitters less effective. Changing eye level makes hitters less effective. Sequences that effect timing makes hitters less effective. Velocity does very little at the highest level.
@@spacelion4763 I agree, now pitch sequencing is mostly on the catcher but the pitcher needs to put it in the right spot, but I agree that velocity is not talent, I will take location and a starter that can get through the seventh inning over a pitcher that only goes 5 and throws 105 any day of the year
idk, batting averages? also back in the day you could just doctor the ball. there's a bunch of reasons why pitchers are better now. pitching wasn't seen the same way in the early 20th century as it is in the modern era.
I was with you until the Lincecum part. Dude was amazing, but longevity does matter. He was great for 4 years only. Zero good years outside of those 4 as well. His numbers fall far too short of HOF level. He should still get more love though for sure.
Clicked for Timmy in the thumbnail. How he was only on the ballot for 1 year is beyond me.
Tim needs to be in the hall of fame
@@JabroniBaseball When he retired he was one of only 2 pitchers to be multiple time All-Star, throw multiple No-Hitters, Win multiple World Series, and win multiple Cy Youngs. The other was Sandy Koufax. Since then Justin Verlander and Max Scherzer have joined that club, but all 4 of them should be no brainer HoFers.
Tim only had 4 good years, then was absolutely awful. He's not HOF worthy.
@@TSD4027 This person knows. He had too brief of a career, no way HOFer. Just like Johan Santana and others.
I would agree if he had done more past 2010
They’ll be another pitcher get 300 wins. It will be more rare for sure because of less starts but it will happen. 3000 hits is already rare. There have only been 33 players ever to do it. I think Altuve will get there (mainly bc he wants it and Houston will let him). They already let Craig biggio go out there and play to reach the number when he was no longer good anymore. freeman has a shot as well. Lots of young talent poised to make a run at it also. Bobby Witt Jr seems like a guy who could do it (to name one). Again, 33 is already very small.
Willie Davis was never on the ballot. Not saying he deserves to be in. But, he at least deserved a shot at being voted down.
Radio and TV announcers also interact with the players daily. They should also be allowed to vote.
Entrusting the HOF & annual player awards to the dilettantes & narcissists in the media was the biggest mistake these leagues and player associations/unions could have ever made. I put no stock into these credentials whatsoever and neither should you.
FYI: the league and players association have nothing to do with HOF voting. The HOF is a separate entity. The fact that players that are banned from MLB can't be inducted was a decision made solely by the HOF. MLB and MLBPA have no say in it.
I mean even the writers themselves have questioned their colleagues within the writers association. It’s just a bad look everywhere
Some writers snubbed players just because they didn't cater to their interview requests or didn't put up with their BS.
@@benvolio28 Yep. What's sobering is how much worse the press has become since the days of Ted Williams and Dick Allen.
17:14 hope these writers don't vote for Altuve when he's eligible. *That'll be his punishment.*
He'll be in, just that they'll make him wait for few years.
The “character clause” has to go. It’s the most brain dead excuse to keep players w HOF stats or borderline guys out
I agree. It’s beyond ridiculous
@@seplays2280 Agreed! It should be based on what you did on the field first
@@JabroniBaseball Not only that, but there's hypocrisy since it's only used to keep players out. For example there, take a contemporary who was on ballots for the steroid era of Dale Murphy, a pretty good player at his peak, came up just before the steroid era exploded so there's no connection to PEDs...and who was noted for years for being one of the nicest guys in the sport- and yet is a fringe HOFer at best. If "character" is enough to keep the PED users OUT of the Hall of Fame, then why doesn't the character clause take a player teetering on the edge like Murphy and put him IN the HOF as a tiebreaker?
There is no such clause.
@@thedanholmes "5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played."
Directly from baseballhall election rules, its public information you can't just say no it doesn't exist.
Agree on your snubs including Bonds et al. Also Bobby Grich. Dwight Evans. Graig Nettles.
The old way still saw great players like Arky Vaughn overlooked because they were in small markets or on poor teams.
Votto will get in. Hernandez, Whitaker, Andru Jones, Bill Dahlen, Dick Allen, Dave Parker, Schilling, Lofton, Tommy J, Kent should all be in
Lofton 130 HRs and 770 RBIs he will never get in
@@TimmyPruitt166 His fielding and baserunning were elite
He had a great peak too
@@DanielSong39 he has some of the weakest offense numbers for anybody with that many yrs, what they call production that wins games.
Votto should have far more hits and HR spending his career on that tiny ballpark. He's borderline, definitely hall of very good.
Naahh....Votto is a slam dunk....he is a darling of the writers
I've been preaching this to anyone that will listen for years! Great video. I'm hoping that we will see a change in the voting sooner than later.
If those guys are HOFers, then Andruw Jones is a HOFer
Are you making a point of Andruw jones not being deserving? Or are you saying he should’ve been mentioned as well?
@@RupertMumphrey Jones is a pretty easy choice due to his fielding excellence and peak value
Willie Randolph, Kenny Lofton would be fine choices for the same reasons
Simmons had a good chance but petered out too early
@@DanielSong39 I know, I just wanted to understand the phrasing.
Andruw Jones not being in is ridiculous.
He’s getting in soon I’m next few years if you follow current ballots and have actually seen some of them from recent years
List is decent 👍👍 This would be my list of top players who should be in the Hall. Due to the PED years, I'd honestly prefer to see guys that bet on baseball be included, instead of the PED stars, as their numbers are greatly inflated in some cases.
1. Shoeless Joe Jackson
2. Pete Rose
3. Hal Chase
4. Bill Madlock
5. Don Mattingly
6. Al Oliver
7. Bill Dahlen
8. Deacon Phillippe
9. Thurman Munson
10. Sherry Magee
Judging by this set of criteria Don Mattingly should be in. Absolutely essential to the Yankees in the 80’s and 90’s. Arguably the best 1st baseman of his era. No steroids. No major controversy. He should be in.
Yes and just like Puckett, Santo, and a few others his career was cut short by injury.
@@CHENLV-b6n David Wright
His fucking nickname is "Baseball" for Christ sake. Come on.
Not a Yankees fan,trust me lol
But wholeheartedly agreed with you!!
Why should "essential to the Yankees" matter? The Yankees were not particularly good during his time there. Under the current playoff format, they would have made the playoffs more frequently, but under the rules of his era, the Yankees only made the playoffs in his final year.
RIP Pete Rose 🌹.. they really let him die before he had his day in the sun..
Still can't believe sheffield and Delgado haven't been placed in yet
Yup, same. I just watched a video with Sheff talking about his career and it blows my damn mind he's not in just completely based off the court of public opinion on steroids, despite never having been popped for them. Aside from Griffey Jr, Sheff had one of the most memorable batting stances of that time. He's an overall stand up guy as well.
Im doing a separate video on HOF snubs and they are absolutely at the top of my list. They were absolute all time greats compared to their contemporaries at the minimum
Steroid era is weird.
Delgado hot booted after 1 year on the ballot because he didnt even get enough votes to stay on the ballot. His only chance is veterans committee 25 years after his retirement. It's a shame, Delgado gets so little respect.
Sheffield? No way.
GREAT content overall once again! Just a heads up: "Cy Young," (at about the 4:37 mark) this is a picture of Grover Cleveland Alexander, not Cy Young. No big deal, just wanted to let you know.
I can't believe Tommy John isn't in the HOF.
I'm totally fine with the drugged players being out.
I think the problem is that the number of players has risen through expansion but the number of votes each writer gets has remained at 10. Maybe that should be 20.
It will never make sense to me that David Ortiz was on a list of players linked with PED’s and gets in first ballot but Barry Bonds can never touch the hall
Yup he was busted
@@DanielSong39 Not to mention whenever this gets brought up, people came to defend him.
@@Iamhungey Ken Griffey Jr. was one of the most obvious juicers around but still loved the Kid!
Let them all in, I say! PEDs are just part of the sport, it would be naive to assume otherwise
@@DanielSong39 It would be more of the lesser evil at least, especially due to the hypocrisy involved.
@@DanielSong39how was he obvious?? Pretty sure everyone thinks he was clean
One thing that is not really factored in is ballpark and teammates. Rice is in the HOF and played about the same time as Dale Murphy and Dave Parker, and has slighly better stats, BUT he played in Fenway, played with many other great hitters, and played in a league with a DH. Ergo, he was always facing more worn out pitching staffs in a small, hitter-friendly park. Switch the players' teams and the stats would swap as well.