By mike cahill

January 6, 2009 1:30 PM | Link to this

Nice to see there are others who hold Vada in high esteem. He was my favorite as well. The Reds never should have traded him. Vada could have hit .340 every year if he would’ve bunted. I guess he thought bunting was for weaker hitters. I have a paver at the GABP entrance area with my name on it and “#1 Pinson fan.” #28 rest his soul.

By Colgar

January 6, 2009 12:17 PM | Link to this

How about the veterans committee? Did you do your fiduciary duty and vote for Bucky Walters? Your good friend George Grande and I believe Bucky should be enshrined.

By mikie

January 5, 2009 12:36 PM | Link to this

i know talking about old timers, isnt really relivant, but you were around back then and,ive always wanted to know,even tho he had some kind of past with,”that other sports writer,”at the time,why isnt vada pinson in the hall? he was awsome,and my childhood hero. seems like he was slighted, bigtime.is there anyway he could eventually be inducted?

By timb

January 5, 2009 11:57 AM | Link to this

Furthermore, TJ, read something. Steroid use may have been against the law, much like underage drinking is (and you can show me the ballplayer who never did that), but taking steroids was not against the rules of baseball. The Players Union and MLB agreed to make steroids illegal and test for them in 2005. Here’s the Wikipedia quote: “The policy, which was accepted by Major League Baseball players and owners, was issued at the start of the 2005 season and went as follows” Frankly, the concept that Pete Rose has standards was the most amusing part of you post. the man changed uniform shirts every half inning after he tied the hit record, so he could sell authentic game worn jerseys. The night he was banned from baseball, he was on QVC hawking his wares to adoring rubes. He has no standards.

By Cait

January 5, 2009 10:29 AM | Link to this

TJ - Steroids are NOT illegal when prescribed by a physician. I’ve noted before - my mom was given a type of steroid by her doctor last year for an ailment. She took them for a few weeks, got better, and stopped using them. None of this says the baseball bunch got their steroids and other PEDs legally. Just saying they are legal when prescribed by doctors.

By BrarHopper

January 4, 2009 10:54 AM | Link to this

I’d vote yes for Bonds in the Hall of Shame. He is such a punk. Even way back in his college days at ASU his teammates HATED him and his me me me attitude. Talk about a guy who never got the “There is no I in team” concept. And to top it off, he has these incredible natural talents and amasses incredible stats but is so jealous of the attention McGuire and Sosa got that he has to load up on steroids and cheat for the rest of his career. Hall of Fame? Hell no! Never! If they reject Pete, then certainly have to reject all the druggies like Bonds, Sosa, Palmeiro, Clemmens, McGuire, Strawberry, Gooden, etc.

By AP-FLORIDA

January 4, 2009 10:40 AM | Link to this

TJ-Are you really Mark Grace? Fess up!

By michael

January 4, 2009 9:38 AM | Link to this

No, Bonds shouldn’t get in the HOF. Some compare Pete’s situation to Bonds but it isn’t relative. Pete didn’t cheat to achieve any of his many all- time records. Though Bonds probably would have achieved HOF credentials, he would not be the all- time home run king without the use of drugs.

By Joe

January 3, 2009 8:50 PM | Link to this

I agree with Hal’s picks. How do all of you feel about Barry Bonds? Does he deserve to be in?

By Y-City Jim

January 3, 2009 6:25 PM | Link to this

From 1984-1988, Mattingly had some very good years. If he had 10+ years like that, there would be a case for him in the Hall of Fame. His overall career makes him good but not Hall of Fame material.

By mwillkie

January 3, 2009 4:14 PM | Link to this

What about Don Mattingly? 9 gold gloves, 14 yrs. .307 cavg., 6 all-star, 85 mvp, 84- 87 top 5 avg., compare to Keith Hernandez, Kirby Puckett

By TJ

January 3, 2009 3:47 PM | Link to this

Just for the record, STEROIDS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ILLEGAL! And not just in baseball, illegal in AMERICA! Sosa and McGwire took steroids which is ILLEGAL! They cheated, they broke the rules and they have to pay the consequences. Hell, Sosa corked his bat! Sosa, McGwire, Bonds, Clemmens, Palmiero, Canseco and all the other cheaters should be no where near Cooperstown unless they are teaming up with Pete Rose for an autograph signing. Though, I think Pete even has his standards. If any of those guys get in, Pete Rose should have a whole wing dedicated in his honor. As for the Hall — Henderson, Dawson and Rice should certainly get in. But how about Mark Grace? .303 lifetime hitter, let the 90’s in hits (~2500 for his career), 4 gold gloves and 1,100+ RBIs.

By HuberTucky

January 3, 2009 1:39 PM | Link to this

The rich just keep getting richer. The NY Yankees (yuck) will pay a whopping $423.5 million to sign free agents Teixeira, Sabathia & AJ Burnett. The smaller market teams in no way can compete with this obscene spending. There will never be parity in MLB until teams are limited in the $ they can spend. I am more than disgusted by the Yankee’s arrogance in spending this year for players. No sport should allow rich teams to buy their way to championships. This kind of disparity in spending causes the game to lose credibility, IMO. I hope someone makes sure that no company that receives bailout $ has box seats or regular seats at the new Yankee Stadium. I want NONE of my tax $ to support a team that lavishes so much $ on players. Further, I see now that the rich, indulgent elitist Yankees & Mets have their corporate hands out AGAIN for NYC municipal bonds to pay for their corporate welfare stadiums. Sickening. Oh, and get a load of this: A-Rod gets $42k per plate appearance, Jeter $29k, Teixeira $35k. Every 5th day, Sabathia will get $34k for each out recorded & when he steps off the mound at the end of the 1st inning of his first start in April, he will have made $102,000 — consdierably more than I make in an entire year. But I guess that’s nothing compared to Wall Street CEO money. It’s all quite troubling.

By Mike-Cinci

January 3, 2009 12:40 PM | Link to this

Peter Edward Rose is no longer on the writers HOF ballot. The HOF veterans committee which consists of 64 living HOF players vote on players who were not elected in the 15 years they were eligible after retirement as a player. Most of the players on the committee have said they would not vote to put Rose in the HOF. There is a great deal of Pete Rose material in the HOF. He is just not honored with membership and a plaque.

By AP-FLORIDA

January 3, 2009 8:19 AM | Link to this

Hal-What if the writers boycotted the HOF and voted for no one, think they might reconsider Pete? Can you arrange that? Also, I enjoy watching the Yankees spend all that money and not make playoffs. Just more reason to root against them.

By ezed

January 3, 2009 12:42 AM | Link to this

Hal YOU ARE WRONG!!! McGwire & Sosa brought MLB back from the Hole the illconceived STRIKE the Players union Bosses put Baseball in.The drugs they were accused of using were not illegal for MLB @ the time.I’ve read your RANT before. But,w/o McGwire & Sosa MLB would be a marginal sport. Like the NBA & soccer,

By Y-City Jim

January 2, 2009 9:10 PM | Link to this

Maybe BB did a Sammy Sosa and corked his bat as well. You have to ol’ Sammy credit. If you’re going to cheat then go all out with the cheat.

By Mike-Dayton

January 2, 2009 6:22 PM | Link to this

Hugh - your aluminum bat theory for the power surge is bad on so many fronts. First off, players already in the major league with established power numbers started hitting many, many more HR’s as they got older and started with PED’s. If the Game of Shadows is even mildly correct on Bonds, then at age 37 he hit 73 HR’s when he average only about half that amount the previous 14 years. Did he start using an aluminum bat in Spring Training. No he got big as a house training like a beast and using PED. Ken Caminiti admitted using steroids while playing for San Diego and his HR go from 18 to 40 in one year. Pal, it wasn’t aluminum bats, it bad pitching, it wasn’t smaller ballparks, it wasn’t the weather or the strike zone, it was steroids and other PED’s that caused the power surge. I can’t prove it but for sure the players knew it made them stronger, quicker, recover faster - and that on top of already world-class eye hand coordination with established muscle memory is the primary cause for the power surge.

By Y-City Jim

January 2, 2009 4:52 PM | Link to this

Jones has agreed to a restructuring of his contract. It is so odd that a player entering his prime years would have such a fallout.

By Mike-Cinci

January 2, 2009 4:34 PM | Link to this

Rarely do ball players make a comeback after having 2 bad years in a row. Andru Jones was awful in his last year in Atlanta and even worse in his first year in LA. I can’ t explain why he fell off a cliff but he is a shadow of his former self. It is best to let LA ponder its 2 year $32 million commitment to the previously good Andru Jones. As we know from the Reds experience with Milton and Griffey it is not fun to have big money tied up in guys who can no longer produce to the level of their salary.

By Rauol

January 2, 2009 3:41 PM | Link to this

Hal, loved your article about watching football from home on New Year’s Day, and I agree with your HOF picks, but think you have to include McGwyer. During his tenure, he was definitely a dominating type of player, if only from a power perspective. All other votes by you are valid, but I too think Jack Morris deserves a serious look.

By nick_trocbo

January 2, 2009 12:13 PM | Link to this

http://www.message_caalzeldelc.com/

By Hugh D. Pohl

January 2, 2009 10:47 AM | Link to this

“… and no one that knows anything about baseball would ever state that the “Use of aluminum bats at lower levels to help players learn to hit off the inside of the bat handle” makes any sense at all”. Pardon my imprecise wording. The actual point was that aluminum bats used in HS and collge have demonstrated to players that it is possible to hit with power off the lower part of the bat and inside by driving the ball the other way. It’s just one POSSIBLE contributing factor. You can even make a case for the HR increase being a statistical artifact (I’ve seen that case made-don’t agree that it is likely though). The point is there is not yet evidence that steroid use alone can increase hitting performance to the degree assume that it does. It may be one factor, am minor factor, or even no factor at all.

By Mike-Dayton

January 2, 2009 10:01 AM | Link to this

Perhaps Tim but you can’t “think/hit” a baseball farther because of superstition. You might relax and have a better AB because you’re comfortable in the box because you put your right batting glove on before the left batting glove, but when you take steroids and see that you can now hit the outside pitch 50 feet farther than you ever could before, it is more than the “think-system”.

By Mike-Dayton

January 2, 2009 9:51 AM | Link to this

The Players Union will not endorse Jones taking a pay cut … the Dodgers might be willing to eat some of his salary making the cost to his new team lower. But he is making over $14 million and he hit .158 in 2008 and .223 in 2007. Even if the Dodgers took $10 million of his salary, Jones is not worth the $4 million - also, Jones can’t be dumb enough to think that he can play hard in 2009 and get another contract since he just tanked on the last contract. Teams might (after 30 years of Free Agency) have actually figured out to NOT pay based on the last year of a player’s contract (when he usually a better year) and to pay based on a 3 year average (or the year before the walk year). And since the Dodgers are stuck with Jones, there can’t be another team willing to help them out with their problem so they get to pay $14 for basically nothing.

By timb

January 2, 2009 9:43 AM | Link to this

Mike-Dayton wrote: “Answer this: If Steroids/PED’s do not “work” and knowing they’re illegal and really bad for your health, the why did/do so many players take them?” I’m no expert in baseball player psychology, so I will concede to Ron Shelton and Crash Davis: “If you think getting laid or not getting laid is why you playing well, then it is.” Simply put, baseball is a game of numbers and luck and players will wear the same hat for 162 games or wear their lucky socks or take a shot if they believe an action keeps them in the Show. MLB players may be fantastic athletes, but they are not renowned for their rational choices, i.e. to hit a baseball, you first have to believe you can.

By Y-City Jim

January 1, 2009 11:40 PM | Link to this

It seems Andruw Jones is willing to take a pay cut to make it easier for the Dodgers deal him. He is in the final year of his contract. It would be a huge gamble but if he could be had cheap it might be worth it. There don’t seem to be a lot of other options out there anyhow.

By Mike-Dayton

January 1, 2009 6:45 PM | Link to this

… and no one that knows anything about baseball would ever state that the “Use of aluminum bats at lower levels to help players learn to hit off the inside of the bat handle” makes any sense at all - let alone would account for anything related to an increase in power. First off, hitting off the bat handle (do you know what the bat handle is?) makes little sense and hitting off the inside of the bat handle makes even less …

By Mike-Dayton

January 1, 2009 6:37 PM | Link to this

Answer this: If Steroids/PED’s do not “work” and knowing they’re illegal and really bad for your health, the why did/do so many players take them?

By Y-City Jim

January 1, 2009 5:12 PM | Link to this

I think the contributing factor to steroid use for hitters is that it increases a hitter’s quickness. It is believed the enhanced quickness allows the hitter to wait longer on pitches. A significant change in pitch counts, walks, and strikeouts would seem to send up some red flags. I’m sure steroids wouldn’t hurt one’s bat speed either.

By Hugh D. Pohl

January 1, 2009 3:49 PM | Link to this

To Mike in Dayton, does this sound like your conclusive proof of the steroid-HR connection?: “On considering the available evidence, it appears that anabolic steroids definitely increase muscle size, and probably strength, but the mechanism is unknown. Further studies, using a crossover design, including inexperienced as well as experienced weightlifters, and the same drug vehicle for both placebo and active drug, with confirmation of subject blinding, should probably be conducted to confirm these findings. In addition, whether androgen-induced muscle hypertrophy translates into improved performance in sports that require skill as well as strength remains to be determined.” Michael C Kennedy Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, St Vincent’s Hospital; and Manly Hospital, Sydney, NSW

By michael

January 1, 2009 3:47 PM | Link to this

Yes, Rose belongs! I would not vote for Mac because he didn’t do half of what Rose did and he used drugs to “cheat” the game. Rickey Henderson belongs for sure. Good choices Hal!

By Hugh D. Pohl

January 1, 2009 3:33 PM | Link to this

“hit off the inside of the bat handle as a cause of the HR increase and not steroids? Have you lost your mind?” No and you picked only part of my point to jump on. Did Babe Ruth change the game by eating hot dogs and drinking beer? Same correlational argument. I think steroids have some relationship to the power increase but I am suspicious that any one substance could have that much impact on the complex skill set required to hit a baseball. The pitching argument makes more sense (allowing muscles to recover more quickly etc.) The metal bat theory is not mine by the way, I’ve seen it posited elsewhere (much more clearly I might add).

By Y-City Jim

January 1, 2009 12:31 PM | Link to this

Hal, what is an accurate assessment of Greg Vaughn’s presence in the Cincinnati clubhouse during his time here? Was he a great team leader or was he just a bully?

By Mark Neal (Lexington, KY)

January 1, 2009 11:56 AM | Link to this

I know that this is Greg Vaughn’s first ballot and he does NOT have the numbers for consideration for the Hall of Fame. But, I was wondering if anyone from the Reds have contacted Vaughnie about being a coach? I did a little prodding around and he seems pretty rooted in California. He was (or maybe is) and assitant baseball coach for a local Christian school there which shows his attachments. But, the guy just approached the game the right way and taught many of the players about what it means to have a major league work ethic. I just think he would be an invaluable asset for this club if you could pry him away from the west coast. Just curious if it’s even been pursued by the current regime.

By Gary Maloy Jr.

January 1, 2009 6:36 AM | Link to this

One other thing. Andre Dawson. I haven’t checked his statistics. But I’ve always felt that his career would have been even better if he hadn’t ruined his legs on the astroturf at Olympic Stadium in Montreal. Watching Ken Griffey Jr. suffering because of damage caused his body by the astroturf of the Kingdome reminds me alot of Dawson. But Griffey accomplished alot more than Dawson early on. I feel that Dawson’s candidacy for the HoF is damaged by his affiliation with the Expos and lovable losers, Cubs throughout his career. (PS. So those KGJr bashers out there- try to remember that he was undocumented damaged goods when Ol’ Leatherpants brought him home to Cincinnati.)

By Gary Maloy Jr.

January 1, 2009 4:53 AM | Link to this

To Mike-Dayton who wrote, “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. Rose hits many of these 100% but misses integrity and character due to his 15 years of lying and denying what was quite obvious to everyone.” My comment - you argue against your own argument. I assume you’re quoting the Hall of Fame charter or something when you write “on which the player PLAYED.” Then, in your very next sentence, you comment his lying and denying which occurred AFTER his playing career was long over. ……….And to timb who wrote, “We do know, he bet on baseball as a PLAYER-MANAGER and as a manager.” My comment - I read the first book that came out after the Rose fiasco and as far as I can recall, Rose was never ‘convicted’ by Giamatti for gambling on baseball while serving as a player-manager. His sins were committed as the manager of the Reds. ……… In addition, timb, you are really looking forward to Pete belongs’ response to your mention of Rose using greenies (amphetamines) during his playing career, thereby discrediting his on-field accomplishments. I found the following on the net after googling “affects of amphetamines on athletes” - “Twenty-six adult male subjects were given a placebo, 20 mg. of amphetamine sulfate, or 800 mg. of meprobamate two hours prior to the administration of tests of reaction time and movement time. No statistically significant differences were found between mean scores or variances for the substances tested. It appears that neither drug in dosages commonly employed in connection with the preparation of athletes for competition has any effect on human simple reaction time or simple movement time in response to a visual stimulus.” (I was an amatuer catcher/1st baseman for 25 years, playing a couple times a week. As I’m sure you’re also aware, the pain and discomfort of playing baseball is considerable - imagine those who play 175-190 games a year (incl. spring training and post season). I’ve read that the greenies were used to get by from day to day - if I may compare to the Rolling Stones’ “Mothers Little Helper”. ………Personally, I feel that Rose’s accomplishments as a player deserve HoF induction - albeit with a caveat that he was excluded from the game for his actions as a manager. That said, I really don’t know why some of Hal’s readers persist in mentioning Rose in response to Hal’s HoF vote. Rose is ineligible and Hal cannot vote for him regardless. Besides, “he” (or his artifacts, to be more precise) are already in the Hall. ………. My take on Hal’s vote? In my opinion, Jim Rice wasn’t even the 2nd best outfielder on the Red Sox (behind Yaz). He hit .225 in the post season and .200 in seven all-star games. I’d give my nod to Fred Lynn ahead of Rice. Lynn was Rookie of the Year AND MVP in 1975. He played in 9 consecutive all-star games (6x starter). He won four golden gloves, hit 306HR, .283 and had a .988 fielding percentage over 17 seasons. He hit .407 in the post season. I’d also cast a vote for Tommy John. He won 288 games in his career despite a serious arm injury of which we’re reminded at least once yearly. He was twice Cy Young runner-up, he has 162 complete games, a career ERA of 3.34. Post-season he was 6-3 with a highly respectable ERA of 2.65. ………. Henderson? Nah. Not first ballot material, in my opinion. Over 25 seasons, he hit .290 or better only 9 times and is considered one of the greatest lead-off hitters of all time? Humbug. I feel he was also highly inconsistent, “spicing” his .290+ seasons with seasons where he hit .267 (1982), .263 (1986), .274 (1989), .268 (1991), .260 (1994). The post-season batting average for baseball’s “best” lead-off hitter was - brace yourselves - .284. Woopteedoo. McGwire. Another no, and it doesn’t have THAT much to do with his steroid useage. He played in only six all-star games, which to me seems low considering his 583HRs. He never won an MVP award. Fully 36% of his hits were home runs (talk about Adam Dunn being one-dimensional!!) Let’s look at his post-season and all-star game numbers. Post-season, .217 avg, 5 hr and 14 rbi in 42 games. Not worthy of HoF consideration. All-star performances? These numbers rock! .200 avg, 0 HR and 2 RBI in 6 all-star games. Not bad for one of the “best players” of his generation. (NOT!) When you take into consideration his “admitted” use of unethical (if not illegal) methods, then McGwire is a definite NO! ………. I could throw some numbers around to try and convince Hal and other readers that I’m right and others are wrong, but that’s not my goal - I just wanted to beat the drum for Lynn and John. In closing I would suggest everyone take a look at something. It’s an interesting read regarding Baseball Hall of Fame balloting which discusses how players gain accumulative support as years pass. http://allgrownsup.wordpress.com/2008/01/18/the-unhallowed-baseball-hall-of-fame/). ………. Hal - any comments to this article? The only thing left to say is to wish all Reds fans a Happy and competitive New Year.

By Rose-Belongs

December 31, 2008 6:38 PM | Link to this

According to your logic, greenies were not illegal at the time, so they were perfectly fine to take. Besides, amphetamines/caffeine have not been linked to crushing a ball more than normal, and breaking records in the process. I’m not saying that amphetamines are ok, but nobody took them to break home run records or to break the record for hits. By the way, Pete is not my favorite player, never was, and I don’t believe he should be let back into baseball. Again, I ask…are his stats or his performance on the field, under question?

By timb

December 31, 2008 5:06 PM | Link to this

Last word, for “Pete belongs,” do you have any reaction to the fact that Rose used illegal drugs (greenies) during his career or was his drug use different from McGwire’s. I long to read the reply to that?

By timb

December 31, 2008 5:03 PM | Link to this

Hey, Mike-Dayton, I think you’re probably right about the home run increase, but from talking to a guy who pitched professionally, it’s opinion the majority of steroids uses were pitchers. Yeah, Sosa and Bonds were juiced, but Bonds was already a tremendous player. Steroids probably prolonged his career, rather than made it. Pitchers, however, needed to get the hill every fifth day and the key to steroids is they help you get stronger by decreasing muscle damage when you work out. So, it makes sense, steroids would help your pitching muscles recover quicker and allow you to be more effective.

By timb

December 31, 2008 4:58 PM | Link to this

You mean his classic .303 batting average? That aside, of course, we don’t know whether Rose cheated on baseball by betting on it when he was a player, since he won’t tell us. We do know, he bet on baseball as a PLAYER-MANAGER and as a manager. And, Rose, like every professional baseball player signs a contract and walks under a sign every day which reads anyone who bets on baseball will get banned. It is rule number one. McGwire, if he did use steroids (and most likely he did) did NOT break a baseball rule. I’ll repeat it since you are obviously unaware your favorite player cheated on baseball by betting on it, steroids were not against the rules when McGwire allegedly used them. Betting on baseball has been against the rules since before Pete Rose’s father was born. Learn to separate your moral indignation about who broke the rules and not the players who broke your heart. Otherwise, you might become one of those Marty Brennaman clones and Lord knows there are enough of them.

By Mike-Dayton

December 31, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this

Really Hugh D Pol (or whatever) - steroids wasn’t the direct cause of Home Run increase? Then why would so many players illegally take them then? The players would be the only true measure of whether they worked or not. Why would an entire generation take steroids if they didn’t work and at the same time, risk being fined, suspended, or released - and we haven’t even talked about the health risks. As a cause of the HR’s, you wrote —— Use of aluminum bats at lower levels to help players learn to hit off the inside of the bat handle?????? —— hit off the inside of the bat handle as a cause of the HR increase and not steroids? Have you lost your mind? They use wood bats in all levels of professional baseball. Only college doesn’t. Have you done any research on the players who have confessed to steroids and how they felt on them? Now that steroids are seemingly trending out of baseball, HR runs are down. … hit off the inside of the bat handle is the dumbest thing I have read in years.

By Mike-Dayton

December 31, 2008 4:36 PM | Link to this

Don’t let any data get in the way of your opinion of Rose and the HOF but here is the criteria: 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. Rose hits many of these 100% but misses integrity and character due to his 15 years of lying and denying what was quite obvious to everyone. Then instead of just telling the truth, he sold the truth to get a book sold. Betting on your team while you’re the manager (but Pete only bet on his team to win is a stupid, stupid argument) will get you thrown out of baseball. Guess what, he got thrown out of baseball with great stats. Too bad - great player, lousy person. Sure he could have done drugs and drank himself into rehab and could have got back into baseball but betting on the game while you’re the manager is a 100% deal breaker. Always has been and always will be.

By Rose-Belongs

December 31, 2008 3:59 PM | Link to this

You trying to sell me or anyone with two eyes, that Rose does not belong in the Hall for what he did on the field and that McGwire does belong because he did cheat on the field? Wow. I’m sorry, but did Rose cheat on the field, when he was playing? Are his stats under question?

By timb

December 31, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

“He cheated the fans, himself, and most importantly, the game of baseball.” Yeah, Rose belongs, McGwire cheated them (how, I’m not sure), but Rose didn’t when he broke baseball’s number one commandment, lied to the fans about it, and intends to keep milking every last dime from his dwindling fan base for years to come. A man calling himself “Rose belongs” calls someone else a cheater! The irony is wonderful

By Rose-Belongs

December 31, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this

Mr. McCoy, love the blog, and love the Reds. Two words…thank you. I worry that too many “baseball” people that matter, do not think as you do when it comes to the steroid/McGwire issue. I can’t help but think of everyone who came before him, and it makes me mad. I don’t care if he helped “save baseball” or if he hit 1000 HR’s. He cheated the fans, himself, and most importantly, the game of baseball.

By hugh d.pohl

December 31, 2008 3:45 PM | Link to this

By the way, I am still not convinced of the power of steroids to turn all these guys into monsters. If steriods are THAT effective, shouldn’t we be praising the miracles of modern science and medicine? How can something that might give someone who is a world-class athlete a fraction of a second edge in a footrace help a baseball player perform a complex series of muscle movements and eye-hand coordination that results in production of dozens more homeruns in a season. There were and are other factors at work that include training methods,use of aluminum bats at lower levels to help players learn to hit off the inside of the bat handle, emphasis of power game in pitching and hitting etc.

By hugh d.pohl

December 31, 2008 3:37 PM | Link to this

Sorry, Hal have to disagree on McGuire unless you want to keep him out based on the PEDs. One argument you give to Henderson (OBP despite not the highest BA) you dismiss for McGuire, a true slugger who had no need for singles to be valuable. To me Dawson and Smith are borderline. I cn go with Blyleven, but not Rice, although Bert’s individual stats did not translate much to his teams winning.

By PaulyOH

December 31, 2008 3:05 PM | Link to this

Hal, I guarantee you that if there were no steroid/hgh suspicions surrounding McGwire, he would no doubt be in the Hall, and deservedly so. Here’s why: 1. First man to hit 70 homers. 2. Summer of 98 and all the media fawning. Saved baseball and all that nonsense. 3. 583 career homers. That’s just too big a number to ignore. And please, can we all agree that OBP is a far superior measure of a hitter’s value than batting average? And this isn’t new school thinking. Branch Rickey understood this concept. McGwire’s lifetime OBP is .394. Also, McGwire was alledgely a stone glove. True, he wasn’t great, but most voters don’t look at defense, especially when discussing slugging first basemen.

By Sam

December 31, 2008 2:53 PM | Link to this

Ricky and Lee Smith only and Lee smith is a little bit of a stretch but he was dominate in his era. No McGuire, no Raines, no Dawson, no Rice, no Bly. They were all good players sometime all-stars but not dominate.

By Good stats, joe?

December 31, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

Among Rickey Henderson’s “good” stats are the fact he retired as the all-time leader in walks, runs and steals. If that isn’t a HOF’er, than there is no HOF. He broke no rules, he’s in. Good ballot, Mr. McCoy. I think you’re missing Tim Raines, though. As good a leadoff hitter as anybody not named Henderson. And, don’t worry, Reds fans. Larkin will get in. As good as Davey with the glove but a much better hitter. Concepcion is porbably top 15-20 all-time for shortstops, Larkin is definitely top 10.

By CAREY, U.S. ARMY

December 31, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

Good comments, Hal. I have to agree to disagree with you on the Yankees, though. Yes, they spend way more than any other team, but they seem to want to win more, too. The Reds keep the “small-ball” mentality and continue to LOSE as well. Would be nice to see them continue going after a veteran or two that can still produce. At the same time, I can understand a salary cap - might have to happen. Would you answer this, please? You’re the one with the decades of experience in covering the Reds/MLB. Isn’t it logical to believe the Reds could have consistent winning seasons (not Playoffs/World Series annually), but winning seasons IF management spends $15-20 Million more/year. Winning will bring more fans to the ballpark, sell more merchandise, Etc. Losing brings losing… Happy 2009, Sir! GOD BLESS AMERICA!

By Old Journal Herald Reader

December 31, 2008 11:48 AM | Link to this

I agree with your stance on McGuire but can’t be concerned about any other votes because the Hall of Fame is irrelevant to me until they admit Pete Rose. Also agree 100% with your feeling on Yankee purchase of pennants. It mmakes baseball a laughing stock. Why don’t we just root for the investment banking firms? Paul B. Cary NC

By Mike-Dayton

December 31, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this

Yo Beaverhead - Hal was referring to the time old Marky Mark and the steroid bunch had a chance to say NO to the steroid question when it was directly asked of them in front of Congress - and ole’ MM would not answer. Now does that make MM guilty? Nope? Does any reasonable person think he took steroids? Yep. If my baseball reputation hung in the balance of one PED question by Congress and I never took PED’s, I would have answered it. By not answering it and looking really really bad avoiding answering it, he looked guilty as hell. MM should have said YES and moved on. And Hal’s 10 years plus as a baseball writer gives him judge and jury status.

By Tony Mollica

December 31, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this

I respectfully disagree with your votes for Rice and Dawson.Baseball Prospectus had a great piece on why neither of them deserved to be in the Hall of Fame. I would add votes for Tim Raines, Jack Morris and Alan Trammel. Hal, I respect all that you’ve done in baseball. This comment was meant as two friends arguing about baseball; rather than a criticism of your baseball knowledge.

By Shawn

December 31, 2008 9:17 AM | Link to this

Kudos on voting for Blyleven, the deserving 287-game winner. And while I disagree on McGwire, I understand your position. I just don’t know why not vote for Ron Santo or Tim Raines, both far more deserving than Jim Rice. People often forget that defense counts too.

By beaverton

December 31, 2008 8:35 AM | Link to this

voting for jim rice over mcgwire is ridiculous…who made you judge and jury about who took performance enhancing drugs and who didn’t…the same guy who maintains pete rose should be in the hall even though he has admitted to taking “greenies” for a pick me up before games…what a joke

By Kevin Osterloh

December 30, 2008 11:29 PM | Link to this

Dear Hal, Way to go - I agree with your position on Mcgwire. However, in light of your avowed opposition to Big Mac, I am wondering what your opinion has been on Pete Rose and the Hall. Also, I am wondering what your two colleagues might think about Pete. Thanks, K. Osterloh

By Ted Lawson

December 30, 2008 8:55 PM | Link to this

To comment on the first commenter. I’ve read Hal’s articles since he started and i’ve never ever heard him say anything whatsoever of Dunn being Hall of Fame material. Hal, I agree wholeheartly with your HOF votes. Mcguire, Clemmons, Bonds have no place in the Hall.

By Ted Lawson

December 30, 2008 8:54 PM | Link to this

To comment on the first commenter. I’ve read Hal’s articles since he started and i’ve never ever heard him say anything whatsoever of Dunn being Hall of Fame material. Hal, I agree wholeheartly with your HOF votes. Mcguire, Clemmons, Bonds have not place in the Hall.

By donb51

December 30, 2008 7:50 PM | Link to this

Hal, How can you say this about McGwire - “Yes, he hit 583 home runs. What else did he do? Not much. His career batting average was .262. When he hit 70 home runs, he had 61 singles. And he wore a glove at first base for decorative purposes only” - when you consistently praised and defended Adam Dunn’s similar, one-dimensional ability?

By Y-City Jim

December 30, 2008 6:18 PM | Link to this

The small market WS teams are rare occurrences. Besides, from a business standpoint, small market teams will find it virtually impossible to become a highly profitable larger market team unless they have the opportunity to consistently put a winner on the field with some high profile players to help market their “product.” I guess that is where the antitrust exemption comes in. Monopolistic practices are allowable as long as that exemption is in place.

By Mike-Cinci

December 30, 2008 5:39 PM | Link to this

Baseball is a great game for many reasons and one of them is the great discussions we can have about who should be in the HOF. If any one of the following get in the HOF then we should probably let them all in…Bonds, McGuire, Sosa, Clemens, Palmeiro. I’m sure there were other players who used steroids or HGH but none of them are HOF worthy. Maddux, Griffey, Jeter, A-Rod, Randy Johnson, Glavine, Biggio, Manny Ramirez, etc, are HOF players and are apparently clean.

By Rick Wright

December 30, 2008 5:04 PM | Link to this

I agree with the Mcguire thing. and I also think Lee Smith was as good as Goosage! I am a lifelong diehard Reds fan and would like to see Pete in the hall!

By Harry the Horse

December 30, 2008 3:53 PM | Link to this

Why does baseball need a salary cap?? Wasn’t it the $ 43 million Tampa Bay Rays that made the World Series last season??? Aren’t the Phillies the World Champs despite Omar Minaya buying every hispanic ballplayer this side of Cuba… Let the Yankees Spend like drunken sailors. When they start developing talent is when I will be worried. Despite Getting CC and Tex and Burnett I still give the Red Sox and Rays a decent chance of staying with New York. Lee Smith is not a Hall of Famer

By bigdog

December 30, 2008 3:44 PM | Link to this

Right on Hal. That’s why you are a Hall of Famer

By timb

December 30, 2008 2:53 PM | Link to this

Cait’s dead on right, Calvin. The NFL DOES have rules specifically restricting player’s off the field criminality (ask Pac Man Jones). Baseball does not. Your argument is particularly specious given that “greenies” have been around for six decades. There’s an article from the Palm Beach Post detailing how common they were and citing folks like Ralph Kiner. Using illegal substances, especially ones legal within the game, is different only because a bunch of moralizing writers, hopped on free food and free caffeine the club bought say it’s different. How many of today’s players have alcohol problems? In the past, alcoholism was rampant among players and coaches. Yet, Hal isn’t out there screaming epithets at the carousers. Selective outrage based upon the games’ rules is one thing. Penalizing players for drinking creatinine, when management provided supplements and turned its back on steroids, is a joke and Hal should know better.

By Cait

December 30, 2008 2:16 PM | Link to this

Calvin, you’re missing the point. I’m not advocating cheating or illegal drug use. I’m saying the standard should be what is accomplished on the field. Also, I’m not making an assumption that McGwire, Bonds, et al obtained legal drugs illegally. HGH and steriods are LEGAL when prescribed by a physician. My mom’s doctor prescribed steroids for her a few months back. A co-worker who stopped growing at 12 years old had HGH injections as a teen. The point is baseball had NOT banned these substances at the time and they CAN be obtained legally, which if done so at the time, would have made the players’ actions LEGAL both under the law and baseball rules. I’m sure some of the stuff was not obtained legally, but until a court of law rules on it, we have no right to condemn a player for using an otherwise legal substance. I’m on the fence with McGwire and I don’t like Bonds, but Bonds and Clemens were dominant players BEFORE they allegedly used the drugs and they are definitely HOF worthy. As for the Plaxico Burress comparison, carrying a gun and shooting yourself are not illegal acts in thd NFL by themselves. However, the NFL does have a player behavior rule/policy that is enforced in these cases. To my knowledge, baseball doesn’t have a similar rule. Maybe it should.

By M

December 30, 2008 2:10 PM | Link to this

Mark Grace? Tim Raines? Are you joking? This is the Hall of Fame, reserved for the elite of the elite. It is not the Hall of Really Good.

By Steve

December 30, 2008 2:05 PM | Link to this

I can’t wrap my brain around some of the fools that choose to rip Hal, ON HAL’s FRAKING BLOG. Take your freedom of speech and blow it out your backside. You don’t have to agree with the man to show some respect. They don’t hand out Hall of Fame inductions like mints on pillows. Like it or not, Hall, I mean Hal, is one of the best at what he does. Why else would you be reading? PS- The money will not buy the Yanks a damn thing, IMO. Teams win, not players. How did throwing $ at problems work out for the Mets?

By Dave

December 30, 2008 1:46 PM | Link to this

Like your ballot with just one exception - Tim Raines. So you didn’t vote for him in his first year of eligibility, fine. But now it’s time to add him - hopefully he and Hawk can go in together next year.

By John Q

December 30, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this

Edwin Snider, If you don’t think there is an eligible candidate (Rickey Henderson) on this year’s ballot, then you shouldn’t even post a comment about a baseball topic. As far as Hal’s supposed baseball acumen, it’s not displayed in his article. The baseball reporters don’t “own” the baseball Hall of Fame. It belongs to the people.

By Y-City Jim

December 30, 2008 12:48 PM | Link to this

When making a Bonds/McGwire comparison remember that Bonds had about 4000 more ABs than McGwire. In regards to a higher percentage luxury tax, it will only work if it leads to increased revenue sharing. A common misconception is that the luxury tax money goes directly to the “impoverished” teams. It goes directly to MLB and is diluted through MLB’s revenue sharing plan. The only alternative to a salary cap would be to substantially increase revenue sharing. I think ownership would rather opt for a salary cap (especially a big cap) so the big markets can maintain their cash cow organizations.

By Jon Poses

December 30, 2008 11:44 AM | Link to this

Hal: I’m based in Columbia, MO — but my good friend Dave Barber, who lives in Dayton and is a long-time stalwart at CityFolk and a fellow jazz and baseball person (note my email address) — keeps me abreast of your astute commentary. Mostly I agree with you. I’m a native New Yorker (not a Yankees fan, by the way but more on your comment in a minute) who arrived here to go to J-School at Univ. of Missouri. I’m the ante-Cardinals fan here — but that’s not why I don’t think MM is deserving of HoF standing. Congressional hearing aside, HGH aside — it comes down to his stats. I’ve said this all along: He’s not a Hall of Famer; home runs aside, is BA is too low and more importantly for a power hitter he doesn’t have 1,500 RBIs. Meanwhile, in the steroid era and beyond now 600 HRs has to be the barometer for power hitters and the 1,500 RBIs needs to be bumped to 1,600. Otherwise every Tom, Dick and Harry will be getting in. In another six/seven years we’re going to have 50-60 500+ HR hitters. They’re all not HoFers. The one that’s going to be very interesting — outside of Bonds, of course, who presents quite the dilemma — is R. Palmiero. He dwarfs McGwire: 3,020 hits, 585 HRs, 1,835 RBIs, .288 Lifetime BA. That’s a pretty complete resume plus a couple of GG if I’m not mistaken. Now, of the rest of your choices — you have to put Rickey in. As crazy as he was/is personally, he’s the greatest leadoff hitter in the game’s history — 1st ballot no question. Re: Rice/Dawson — on the edge but I’ll give it to them based on T. Perez and Cha-Cha getting in; re: Blyleven… I’ve come around to thinking he’s deserving. Lee Smith — I’m with you. He should go in. Now, before we get to the Yankees… I have to say that one of the guys that’s overlooked — particularly if we’re talking Rice/Dawson in — is Harold Baines. Look at his lifetime stats: .289 BA; 2,800+ hits; 1,628 RBIs; 384 HRs. True, he’s now primarily remembered as a DH (please, let’s not talk about E. Martinez in the same breath) but if you look at his first six/seven years he’s high up in the outfield assists — and he had great arm. If he falls off the ballot (5% rule) this year that will be tragic. Okay… on to the Yankees… The team’s spending is ridiculous and embarrassing — w/o question — however free-agency is not the demise of competitive baseball — so let them spend all they want. I would only point to the span of 1949-1964 — essentially Yogi Berra’s career and a 16-year period. The Yankees won the pennant in all but two of those years and they won the World Series NINE times. True, there were fewer teams to compete against and no playoffs to have to march through, but those actually form some kind of quirky counter balance to dynasties. I don’t think any team — even if they make the playoffs as many years as the Yankees played in the WS during that period — is going to win the World Series in that dominant fashion. Do ballplayers make too much money? We all know the answer to that; so does Sylvester Stallone — and George Bush for that matter. So, the Yankees spending is stupid but a salary cap is not the answer. Perhaps maybe a higher percentage of luxury tax is in order — but no cap, never. Name one baseball owner who has not made money from buying a baseball franchise. They’re like NYC Taxi Medallions — their worth just keeps on climbing. There you have it… Hal, think about Harold Baines for the HoF. — Jon Poses…

By sayitaintsosa

December 30, 2008 11:22 AM | Link to this

What about Mark Grace? He led baseball in hits in the 1990s and was a career .303 hitter. He also never had more strikeouts than walks in any one season, ever.

By sayitaintsosa

December 30, 2008 11:21 AM | Link to this

What about Mark Grace? He led baseball in hits in the 1990s and was a career .303 hitter. He also never had more strikeouts than walks in any one season, ever.

By sayitaintsosa

December 30, 2008 11:21 AM | Link to this

What about Mark Grace? He led baseball in hits in the 1990s and was a career .303 hitter. He also never had more strikeouts than walks in any one season, ever.

By Calvin Snider

December 30, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this

More than one poster has made the statement that they believe that Bonds and jjjshould someday be in the Hall of Fame, because the drugs they used where not banned by baseball at the time they were using them. What a load of crap. The drugs were against the law when these players were using them. Since when is baseball above the law? If your going to make that argument, than why not say that carrying a gun into a night club and shooting your self as Plaxico Burress did is not against the rules of the NFL. I think it is silly to make the statement that the HOF has other cheaters, so cheaters should be allowed in today. Ok, if that is the case than how about letting your kids cheat on their school work? Other kids have gotten away with it, so it must be ok, right? Wrong! This should be a nation that rewards ethics, not cheaters. I have heard the same statement about Nixon. Other presidents did crooked stuff, why pick on poor tricky Dicky? No player in my opinion who cheated by using drugs, even if those drugs were not banned at the time of use, should ever be in the Hall of Fame.

By Mike-Cinci

December 30, 2008 10:54 AM | Link to this

Tony Perez is in the HOF and deservingly so. Here is the comparison of Perez and Jim Rice stats. Jim Rice (16 seasons)-HR 382, RBI 1451, BA .298,OBP .352. Tony Perez stats(23 seasons) HR 379, RBI 1652, BA .279, OBP .341. Both deserve the HOF.

By Y-City Jim

December 30, 2008 10:53 AM | Link to this

On the subject of a salary cap, I think it will take divine intervention to happen. There is a significant number of owners who do not want a level playing field, and certainly MLBPA is not going to jump at the chance unless a convincing argument can be made to show that it benefits their members somehow. Setting a high salary cap, such as $150 million, might be a way to win some converts. Also if it is possible to demonstrate that an even playing field would result in a dramatic rise in MLB’s popularity thus greater revenues for MLB as a whole it could help sell the idea.

By sd_fiend

December 30, 2008 10:48 AM | Link to this

I love this ballot. What I don’t love is people acting indignant about why writers are the ones who vote for inductees (John Q and mike, for example) The reason is simple: the Hall of Fame is essentially the property of the Baseball Writers’ Association of America. It’s their list. They name the people on that list.

By Y-City Jim

December 30, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this

While I always have considered Rickey Henderson to be a jerk, his overall career stats are mind blowing. .401 OBP, 127 OPS+ for a leadoff hitter are outstanding. Don Mattingly, on the other hand, always seemed like an outstanding guy (especially for a Yankee :D) but his career stats are pretty mundane.

By Cait

December 30, 2008 10:38 AM | Link to this

I should add that I think McGwire, Bonds and Clemens, should eventually make the HOF. They were dominant players and my understanding is the substances they used were not banned by baseball at the time. The HOF has other cheaters (Gaylord Perry), illegal drug users (Fergie Jenkins) and unsavory characters (Ty Cobb). I would penalize the HGH/steroid players by not voting them in on their first ballot, but giving them the nod later. Never voting for them is like penalizing Pete Rose the versatile, dominating player for the stupid actions of Pete the manager. HOFers should be honored for their accomplishments on the field. We’re not nominating them for sainthood. (For the record, I would urge baseball to partially lift Pete’s ban so he can be enshrined in the HOF, but continue his ban from managing/coaching/playing.)

By Cait

December 30, 2008 10:20 AM | Link to this

Good column, Hal. John Q.: Hal is a member of the Baseball Writers of America Association. The BBWAA members of, I believe 10+ years, do the HOF voting. Plus, Hal, knows baseball better than anyone posting here. Hal, I agree with your ballot, especially Dawson. I’m a lifelong Reds fan, but I grew up in the era Dawson played and loved watching him. Is Concepcion done? I hope the Vets committee puts him in. If Davey isn’t in, then Larkin shouldn’t make it either. I think both deserve it. (Portsmouth’s Al Oliver, too.) As for the Yankees, I get a kick out of watching them miss the playoffs after spending that kind of money. However, a salary cap is needed. It’s the best thing that the NFL did. Except for the Bengals and Lions, the NFL is the most balanced, competitive league. Miami from 1-15 to the playoffs! I love baseball, but the NFL rules.

By Edwin Snider

December 30, 2008 10:15 AM | Link to this

There is not one eligible player that really jumps out at the election committee this year. Having said that, Hal has a lot more experience and insight than any of us posters. As for mike, bad drivers, and John Q., all you have done by posting here is show your complete and utter ignorance of baseball.

By timb

December 30, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this

For once, I completely and profoundly disagree with you, Hal. Whatever you might think of steroids, when McGwire or Bonds or dozens of pitchers across the league used them, they were NOT against the rules of the sport they played. Manny Alexander, Brady Anderson, a host of almost middle relievers were caught with steroids over the years and no approbation has ever been spent by our tribe of moralizing scribes on these men! Consider also, the use of stimulants throughout the game back into the ‘50’s and 60’s. Players regularly took amphetamines, including Hall of Fame players (anyone here even read Ball Four?). McGwire and Sosa saved baseball after the owners tried to destroy it . Whereas Sosa was never that good of a ballplayer, McGwire’s career OBP was .394 and he slugged .588! The idea that he had to hit singles to help his team is ludicrous. Our sainted Gambler’s career OBP was .375 and he slugged a Patterson-esque .409, yet peopple around here think he belongs in the HOF. It case it is unclear, Hal, you wasted your precious vote, because you want to vote on a man’s life instead of his amazing baseball career. Mark was one of the most exciting players to pick up a bat in the last 20 years.

By Oldtimer

December 30, 2008 9:35 AM | Link to this

Re: The outrageous salaries paid by the Yankees and others while millions of Americans are out of work and struggling to make ends meet. I propose a different type of luxury tax. Owners can pay players whatever they want, but anything over $500,000 must be matched dollar and go into a fund to create new jobs for the unemployed. In other words let these wealthy owners, not the taxpayers, underwrite bailouts.

By Jon, Cville

December 30, 2008 9:26 AM | Link to this

Why is Don Mattingly never mentioned as a contender ever? He’s a career .307 hitter, was the ‘85 MVP, and had 9 Gold Gloves. Yes he only went to the playoffs once, but I think he was a great player and should have more consideration. Don’t get me wrong, I hate the Yankees, but I still think he is owed a little more thought.

By ross

December 30, 2008 9:23 AM | Link to this

concepcion..before you had shortstops like ripken, arod, davy was the best in the decade of the 70’s..guys like pee wee reese, aparicio, ozzie and his back flips..davy should be in no question if those guys are in

By Jon, Cville

December 30, 2008 9:22 AM | Link to this

Why is Don Mattingly never mentioned as a contender ever? He’s a career .307 hitter, was the ‘85 MVP, and had 9 Gold Gloves. Yes he only went to the playoffs once, but I think he was a great player and should have more consideration. Don’t get me wrong, I hate the Yankees, but I still think he is owed a little more thought.

By Wade

December 30, 2008 9:20 AM | Link to this

I absolutely love reading every one of your articles and have even directly e-mailed you only to be shocked that a HOF writer replied to a young Reds fan. You are truly an asset to MLB. Regarding McGwire you are much more privy to information that I’d only dream of knowing. I understand that he and Sosa had a swirl of speculation surrounding their miraculous HR race of `98. However, I am looking at it from a young baseball fans perspective. In 1987 (I was 7 at the time) I used to trade my neighborhood friends for all of their Mark McGwire, Barry Bonds, Pete Rose, and Jose Conseco baseball cards. It is funny to look back at my collection and reminisce about playing home run derby, pick up games, and pickle when I would emulate those “heroes” in my eyes. Those guys helped me build a lifelong love for the game of baseball. When my interest in baseball began to fade in 1998 I was drawn to this magical competition of brute strength. I was a wide-eyed freshman at UD looking for anything entertaining. My entire dorm floor would stop in the evenings and congregate to the commons area just to witness history. Even the non baseball fans would come around and act like a child while either cheering or booing. So with that perspective I realize that the players whom I used to barter for their cards despite their moral flaws were good for baseball. They were good because they were polarizing. You either loved them or hated them but they established my generations passion for baseball. It is not for me to judge their moral character, someone bigger than me can do that. But as hard as it is for me to swallow that a so called “cheater” would be in the HOF; it has made me realize that those borderline players actually helped baseball. I place blame on the current commissioner because he buried his head in the sand and chose profit over his obligation to preserve the integrity of the game. So I close by saying every competitive person will seek any edge possible to help their overall performance which in turn ultimately helps their team. They walk the tightrope of the rules: spitballs, sandpaper, stealing signs, nicotine, caffeine, ephedrine, creatine, andro, steroids, and HGH. The ultimate question is whether or not they were good for baseball on the field. Have a great new year and may the Reds finish first while the Yankees again finish behind the Rays!. Good health and God bless!

By Bill

December 30, 2008 8:38 AM | Link to this

I like Henderson and Blyleven from your ballot. Taking nothing away from the other 3 guys that you voted for but they are simply above average ballplayers that had a few great seasons. My lasting memory of Lee Smith is opening day 1988. I was in the RF grandstands. He gets a standing ovation from the Fenway fans before ever throwing a pitch for the Red Sox. He blows the lead and a guy that should be on your ballot, Alan Trammell, delivers the game winning hit for the Tigers. Tim Raines should be on the ballot ahead of Rice. Personally, Blyleven, Rickey, Trammell, Raines, and McGwire would be on my ballot if I had one. I am of the belief that you either have to vote for the best of the era or condemn them all. I would choose to vote for them.

By shadowoman

December 30, 2008 8:07 AM | Link to this

I totally agree with the pick of Andre Dawson. Sometimes I think that a player’s stats (and Dawson’s were good) should also tie in with on-field attitude, as with Dave Parker who I also loved. The Hawk was good for baseball because his tremendous heart and winning attitude was as infectious to club leadership as his stats. Great choice, Hal!!

By jeremy hill

December 30, 2008 8:04 AM | Link to this

Hal, Great choices for your HOF ballot. I agree with all of them. I have no idea how Blyleven is not in yet. People need to go back and look at his stats, CG and SHO.

By Pete

December 30, 2008 7:44 AM | Link to this

mike… Dude, you can’t be serious! And before you post anything in the future, brush up on your spelling & grammar, huh?

By mike

December 30, 2008 7:12 AM | Link to this

I think your a great baseball guy hal, but it’s because of guys like you that the current game is partially ruined. McGwire helped save baseball (I know everyone forgot), Pete Rose helped build baseball, the hall of fame is for on field accomplishments only, you can’t hold them out and let babe ruth and ty cobb in, it’s a sham, old guys who think they know better then the rest of us vote in players we don’t care about, like jim rice, burt, and lee smith, none of which would make a current all star team even in their primes, your probably not going to vote for griffey jr too right? what a joke, maybe we shouldn’t remember your past accomplishments either, then what kind of job would you have? hypocrite

By joe

December 30, 2008 6:58 AM | Link to this

I agree that Henderson had good stats only because he was in financial troubles and played 25 seasons! Not a hall of famer in my book.

By Joe Laber

December 30, 2008 6:06 AM | Link to this

Thanks for voting for “the HAWK” Andre Dawson!!!! He was truly a well rounded ALL STAR! One of the good guys of MLB!

By rj

December 30, 2008 4:57 AM | Link to this

Pete Rose. The so-called “hall” is a sham.

By oftenimpersonatedposter

December 30, 2008 2:33 AM | Link to this

ricky henderson? a leadoff hitter with a 279 lifetime average is the best leadoff hitter of ALL TIME? i hear that nonsense all of the time and i just shake my head. 3000 hits, in what? 25 seasons? huh? i’ll listen to your hof argument, IN MAYBE FIVE YEARS—AND I AM PLEASED TO TELL THE MORON ABOVE THAT YOU ARE GOOD ENOUGH TO VOTE FOR THE HOF IF FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE HOF YOURSELF. i don’t even make the case that rose was the best leadoff hitter and he has a much much better argument.

By Corbin

December 30, 2008 2:30 AM | Link to this

I agree with all Hal’s votes except for Jim Rice. no doubt Rice was a good player, but not a GREAT player who deserves to be included with the greats already in the HOF. Henderson should be a first ballot entry and Lee Smith was as dominant a closer in his time as anyone-more so than Goose. Dawson also deserves it-a multi-dimensional 5-tool player. he just got stuck in Montreal for too long

By John Q.

December 30, 2008 2:03 AM | Link to this

Why does a guy from the “Dayton daily news” get a baseball hall of fame vote anyway? Without the steroids McGwire is a first ballot HOF. What’s the point about only 61 singles??? Makes no sense. How about Slugging percentage, On Base Percentage. Plus he did most of that in a pitchers park (Oakland) He won a gold glove in 1990. What’s he going on about a lead glove. Rice is a joke. One of the most over-rated players in baseball history. Tim Raines and Alan Trammell should be on that ballot.

By John Q.

December 30, 2008 2:01 AM | Link to this

Why does a guy from the “Dayton daily news” get a baseball hall of fame vote anyway? Without the steroids McGwire is a first ballot HOF. What’s the point about only 61 singles??? Makes no sense. How about Slugging percentage, On Base Percentage. Plus he did most of that in a pitchers park (Oakland) He won a gold glove in 1990. What’s he going on about a lead glove. Rice is a joke. One of the most over-rated players in baseball history. Tim Raines and Alan Trammell should be on that ballot.

By Y-City Jim

December 30, 2008 1:22 AM | Link to this

The luxury tax money goes to MLB, not the individual teams. The teams do see some money from MLB’s revenue sharing plan though. I have to disagree with the analysis that McGwire was one dimensional. His overall offensive numbers are staggering (some unbelievable OBP, OPS, RBI, and Runs Scored totals) and he even won a Gold Glove in 1990. That said, I consider him a cheat. If the whole era is damned by his denial into the HoF then so be it.

By Calvin Snider

December 30, 2008 12:00 AM | Link to this

I agree with you 100%. The Yankees over spending has and continues to hurt the game. They spend money like it is going out of style to try and buy the title and series, but yet come with hat in hand to the people to ask for more tax free bonds for the new stadium. I think that baseball not only needs a cap like the other professional teams have, but Congress needs to withdrawal MLB’s trust exemption, which was given around 100 years ago when Congress determined that baseball was a game. It is not just a game anymore, it is as the Yankees, and teams like them, Big Business. That’s what owners, players, and agents keep saying when it suits their purpose. Let Congress start talking about ending the exemption, and I am betting you will hear a different tune. I say let MLB compete on a fair basis, and let’s see how they do. The other major sports are doing just fine without an exemption, and with a salary cap, in fact the cap is in my opinion, one of the best things to happen to NFL.

By Nick Essasky

December 29, 2008 11:39 PM | Link to this

Hal, How can you leave Jack Morris off your list? How soon people forget what a big game pitcher he was.

By Jim

December 29, 2008 11:15 PM | Link to this

Remember when Ickey Henderson broke Lou Brock’s steals record and declared himself the greatest ever? Later on that evening Nolan Ryan pitched his seventh no-hitter, upstaging Ickey, in both accomplishments and class. Let Ickey wait one more year so we can warm up to him being the greatest, and let him remember his homerun against the Reds in the 1990 World Series, as the only thing great he did that series. Jim Rice is just not a HoFer (is Fred Lynn not available), might as well vote for Dave Parker, neither is that deserving. Blyleven, Smith, and Dawson I agree on. Davey Concepcion should already be in, won’t be long before we are having this debate about Barry Larkin, I feel both should be in but I am biased by the fact that I am a Reds fan, neither will probably ever make it without the veterans committee.

By bad drivers

December 29, 2008 10:44 PM | Link to this

Wake up old man Its time to hang up your pen and let someone else who has an ounce of sense do the sports reporting.

By Ryan

December 29, 2008 10:34 PM | Link to this

Dave Concepcion?

By Stos

December 29, 2008 10:19 PM | Link to this

I agree with not voting for McGwire based on the fact he was very one dimensional. The roids stuff is incidental to me cause, if you punish one, you have to punish all from that era, and no one’s going to ignore an entire era of players. As for the rest of your picks, Rice would be the one I’d say no to. After 1979, he was merely a decent player as he topped a 140 OPS+ only once in that time. If I’m putting an 80s OF in, it’s Tim Raines.

By Mike-Cinci

December 29, 2008 9:50 PM | Link to this

Hal: I agree with your HOF ballot. All deserve it but I suspect only Rice and possibly Henderson make it this year. The Yankees will spend less in 2009 than 2008. Mussina, Abreu, Giambi are off the payroll. Petitte may not be back. The money for Sabbathia, Burnett, and Teixeira only replaces what they lost. They have much more revenue than other teams so they can buy whatever they want whenever they want.

By got milk

December 29, 2008 9:34 PM | Link to this

Is Davey Concepcion no longer on the ballot?

By Chi Redsfan

December 29, 2008 9:05 PM | Link to this

probably because he as on the Vet ballot? Sorry.

By Chi Redsfan

December 29, 2008 9:04 PM | Link to this

Why not Santo?