2008 BBWAA Hall of Fame Results

by cardsfan84 on Jan 8, 2008 2:19 PM EST Comment 23 comments

Congratulations to Goose Gossage on his pending induction on July 27, 2008 to the National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, NY!

Players are followed by their total number of votes in parentheses and their total percentages.

Rich Gossage (466) 85.8%
Jim Rice (392) 72.2%
Andre Dawson (358) 65.9%
Bert Blyleven (336) 61.9%
Lee Smith (235) 43.3%
Jack Morris (233) 42.9%
Tommy John (158) 29.1%
Tim Raines (132) 24.3%
Mark McGwire (128) 23.6%
Alan Trammell (99) 18.2%
Dave Concepcion (88) 16.2% - last time on ballot
Don Mattingly (86) 15.8%
Dave Parker (82) 15.1%
Dale Murphy (75) 13.8%
Harold Baines (28) 5.2%

Players being removed from the ballot:
Rod Beck (2) 0.4%
Travis Fryman (2) 0.4%
Robb Nen (2) 0.4%
Shawon Dunston (1) 0.2%
Chuck Finley (1) 0.2%
David Justice (1) 0.2%
Chuck Knoblauch (1) 0.2%
Todd Stottlemyre (1) 0.2%
Jose Rijo (0) 0%
Brady Anderson (0) 0%

Major League Baseball's official release:

Rich "Goose" Gossage, who may be better known for his first tour with the Yankees (1978-83), was elected on Tuesday in his ninth year on the ballot. He'll join his former Padres manager, Dick Williams, on the stage behind the Clark Sports Center this coming summer.
Williams, who won the World Series twice as manager of the A's and will go in wearing an Oakland cap, teamed with Gossage in 1994, as the Padres won the first National League pennant in franchise history.
Jim Rice, the former star of 16 seasons, all with the Red Sox, barely missed by 16 votes as he fell 2.8 percent (72.2) below the necessary 75 percent to gain admission to the hallowed red-brick Hall on Main Street in Cooperstown. He'll undoubtedly go in next year, when Rickey Henderson will be an obvious first-time favorite. Rice then will be on the writers' ballot for his 15th and final year.
Gossage, who fell short by 21 votes in 2007, was this time named on 85.8 percent or 466 of the 543 ballots cast.
Andre Dawson, who hobbled on bad knees through many of his 21 seasons with the Expos, Cubs, Red Sox and Marlins, received almost a 10-percent uptick to 65.9 percent and may be right on the bubble in 2009. Voters from the Baseball Writers' Association of America also are taking another look at Bert Blyleven, a pitcher whose career ended after 22 seasons, just 13 victories shy of 300. Blyleven finished fourth behind Gossage, Rice and Dawson with a healthy 61.9 percent of the vote.
In the wake of last month's Mitchell Report, Mark McGwire, the first star player tainted by the steroids era to face the electorate, finished at 23.6 percent, almost exactly the same place as last year, when he also received 128 votes despite hitting 70 homers in 1998 to win his famous record home run race against Sammy Sosa and finishing with 583 in his career. In 2007, McGwire also received an underwhelming 23.5 percent.
Of the 11 first-timers on the ballot, only one -- Tim Raines -- received the requisite 5 percent to remain on the ballot. Raines earned 132 or 24.3 percent. Dave Concepcion, the shortstop on Cincinnati's great "Big Red Machine" teams of the 1970s, received 88 votes or 16.2 percent on his 15th and final chance among the writers.

0 recs | Comment 23 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Too bad

The autographed collection of Shawon Dunston's undies just fell a few pennies on eBay. I do think that "the Hawk" is deserving. Hopefully next year. Surprised about Raines; I thought he'd get more votes this year - if Tim Wallach was on the ballot; the Montreal trifecta would be in play.

"Dude, we're running out of stadium" - said on the way to our seats in Section 428.

by bukowski on Jan 8, 2008 2:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Good for Goose...but

it's a shame that because of the inflated offensive numbers of the "steroid era" that HOF worthy guys like Andre Dawson, Dale Murphy and Dave Parker continue to get over looked and shut out of the Hall each year.

It's like a player from the 1980's HAD to hit 3,000 hits or have 500 HRS to get in. If they didn't they don't get in because of the numbers some of the players from the 90's to today have and it's unfair to compare the players from that era to the players of the last 15 years for many reasons.

They should really look at the guys from the 80's and compare their numbers to the players of their era. If they did, guys like Dawson, Murphy, Parker, Raines, and Lee Smith should be voted in.

I respect the Hall of Fame but I really think they should adjust their "rules" a bit. Sadly I still have a feeling that it's just a popularity contest with a lot of the writers and they don't fully look into what each player did during their era to be considered.

by KYCards on Jan 8, 2008 2:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Tim Raines

How the heck does Raines only get 25% of the vote? Its like the hall is saying, "Hey you're one of the best leadoff hitters ever, but since you played at the same time as Ricky Henderson we don't like you."

by maurerdj on Jan 8, 2008 3:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I agree

I think what is hurting both Raines and Andre Dawson is that they played a big part of their career in Montreal and in 2008 the Expos is a embarrising former franchise for some of these writers. And this leaves a stain on their careers for whatever stupid reason.

It sounds retarded but I have a feeling that alot of the voters have either choosen to forget about these great players from the 80's or have a bias on what teams some of these players played with during their "prime".

I have a feeling that if Raines, Dawson, Murphy or Lee Smith played for the Yankees in their prime they would be preparing their acceptance speech right now.

by KYCards on Jan 8, 2008 3:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Location " "...

No doubt location is part of it, but I think if Raines had more in the power dept. and a higher OBP, he's in. Being the fifth all time SB leader doesnt guarantee much sadly, then theres the coca leaf dilemma for a bunch of writers. He was one hell of an exciting lead off hitter, hit a few triples too, but not in the top 100 by just a few.

John, Blyleven and Smith should be in. The first two on sheer tenacity alone.

If Gossage finally gets in, Smith should be a lock....maybe Morris?

If we can't be good, can we at least be lucky?

by cardschinmusic on Jan 9, 2008 7:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Lee Smith

Next year is probably his last real chance at getting in:
All-Time Save Percentage Leaders

1. Trevor Hoffman- 524/63 (89.3%)
2. Mariano Rivera- 443/59 (88.2%)
3. Billy Wagner- 358/55 (86.7%)
4. Troy Percival- 324/53 (85.9%)
5. Robb Nen- 314/54 (85.3%)
6. Dennis Eckersley- 390/71 (84.5%)
7. Lee Smith- 478/103 (82.2%)
8. Rollie Fingers- 341/110 (75.6%)
9. Bruce Sutter- 300/101 (74.8%)
10. Goose Gossage- 310/112 (73.8%)
HOF'ers
Current Players
Lee is 7th all-time in save percentage and 2nd all-time in saves.

I will be boxer briefs

by Hardcore Legend on Jan 8, 2008 4:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Glaring inaccuracies here...

Do any of these writers do RESEARCH? That's my question -- they are reporters, so occasionally they must do some research, and the tools on the web (like baseball-reference.com) make it easy to compare guys to other HOF players and other players of their era. So, I ask:

How the hell is Don Sutton in the Hall of Fame but Bert Blyleven is sitting on the outside looking in? Neither won a Cy Young, both won twenty games just one time, but had Blyleven played on some of the ballclubs that Sutton played on, he probably would have won 330 games and been a factor in numerous postseasons. Blyleven playes on uber-craptastic teams throughout his career, and only saw three postseason appearances, while Sutton played on some stellar Dodger teams in the late 60's and early 70's. Blyleven has more K's, complete games, shutouts, and his ERA and WHIP are within 10 points of Sutton's. Both pitched in the same era, which can only mean one thing: writers apparently don't read Bill James!

I'm not sure I agree on Tim Raines -- I don't think that Kenny Lofton is a HOF player, but had he played in the 80's I believe his numbers would look very similar to what Tim Raines put up, and if Lofton ends up playing 23 seasons like Raines he would easily end up with 3000 hits. He was a great leadoff hitter for a 4-6 year stretch with Montreal, as was Lofton in Cleveland.

Rice deserves to be in and I think he will be next season. Dave Parker is an interesting case, but I don't think that someone who compares statistically to Chili Davis, Rusty Staub, and Luis Gonzalez is really HOF worthy. I think Dawson deserves to be in as well, he was the classic combo of power and speed before playing on the turf at Olympic Stadium ruined his knees.

"I just wish that the late Harry Carey were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jan 8, 2008 5:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'm glad Rice and Dawson didn't get in...

neither is deserving. both are on the bubble due to the endless boston and chicago hype machines. dawson was an out machine, basically refusing to take a walk his whole career and rice really had only one outstanding season.

raines, otoh, is a hall of famer. he was the nl equivalent to henderson minus the golfer length career.

by indakind on Jan 8, 2008 5:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I don't completely disagree, but...

Dawson would probably have had a shot at 500 HR/500 SB had his knees held up. I wouldn't put him in on his accomplishments in Chicago, outside of his first year there he was a pretty average right fielder, so I don't understand the "endless Chicago hype machine" mantra.

Rice had more than just one outstanding season. His three year run from 1977 to 1979 was one of the better three year averages of that era. He had over 200 hits four times in his career and had three 39 homer seasons and one 40 homer season. I assume you were talking about his 1978 MVP season, but I would argue that his best season was probably 1979, only the Red Sox finished 11 games back and Fred Lynn had a fantastic season that year, which stole MVP votes from Rice. I would argue that Rice was the best player in the league that year, considering that Don Baylor won the MVP playing for the Western Division winning California Angels and playing over half his games at the DH position. The only knocks against Rice would be that he doesn't have great career numbers, he played in a hitters park, and that he was an atrocious defensive player for most of his career. I still feel that he's HOF worthy however.

"I just wish that the late Harry Carey were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jan 8, 2008 6:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, well other than

"The only knocks against Rice would be that he doesn't have great career numbers, he played in a hitters park, and that he was an atrocious defensive player for most of his career."

Just exactly why would you vote for him? I would love to have seen Dawson's career numbers if he played his whole career in Fenway. Look what happened to Fred Lynn when he left Fenway. No way would I vote for Rice.

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Jan 8, 2008 10:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

in all fairness

I'm pretty sure Rice holds the record for "GIDP's in a 4 year span", with 132 GIDP's from '82-85. Also, all 5 guys who GIDP more times than him are in the hall, which has to mean something. Surely that wasn't due to the cute little half-a-ballpark they have in bawston (156 home vs 159 away).

Then again, it's a slippery slope. Julio Franco is only 3 GIDP behind Rice, and if we let Rice in then we have to consider Franco...

the bums will always lose...

by SleepyCA on Jan 8, 2008 11:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Why would I vote for him?

I think I sorted that out pretty well in the post above. He had one of the better three year runs in the 1970-1990 era. Anyone with a better three year average from that era is probably making the HOF, or already IN the Hall of Fame. He had 5 seasons in which he finished in the top 5 in the league in the triple crown categories -- which are what you vote a power hitting/no defense player in on. There are plenty of outfielders in the Hall with much worse credentials than Rice has.

I wasn't a fan of Dawson either, but you have to put his numbers in perspective a little bit as well when you consider his Montreal days. The numbers he put up in the early part of his career were fantastic for a guy who hit in the middle of the order in the early 80's. The Montreal teams of the era were built very similar to the Whiteyball era Cardinal teams in that they manufactured runs, didn't have a lot of power hitters, and stole tons of bases.

And, imo, if Ryne Sandberg is a HOF'er than Andre Dawson pretty much has to be in, even though they don't play the same position. I, truthfully, do not know why people consider Sandberg to be a Hall candidate when every peer of his would be laughed out of the HOF conversation: guys like Lou Whitaker, Alan Trammell, Dave Concepcion, and so on. Why does Sandberg get a pass on that criticism?

"I just wish that the late Harry Carey were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jan 9, 2008 2:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think Dawson quite cuts it

He had issues with injuries, no doubt, but I still don't think he ought to make the cut.

I think players that have their numbers cut short by injury need to have a 3-4 year span, at least, where they were dominant. Outside of his 87' season I just don't consider Dawson to be at that level.
Although he did have knee problems, his career did span 21 seasons and just under 10,000 AB's. That's not too bad really when you think of it in those terms.
His OBP was abysmal - .323. Not that he wasn't a great ballplayer. But I don't think you can completely ignore that number when forming an opinion on him.

by Merry CRasmus on Jan 8, 2008 11:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Blyleven deserves it

One of the more underrated pitchers out there. We need to get to the point where we can look past wins and losses as it pertains to pitchers. He's good enough IMO.

I think Raines is very borderline. A case could be made for him, but I guess I'd line up on the no side. In a basestealing era where guys would have something like 40 steals in a season but often caught 20 plus times, we have Tim Raines who was exceedingly efficient at it and stole all the time. All this in an era where stealing effectively had more value because runs scored were more sparse. Plus he was an on base machine. I'd probably not vote for him, but I wouldn't argue with anyone that did.

McGwire is a case study on how history will view the steriod era, and I think that might be fair.

So I think Gossage deserves it, but so did Blyleven. There ought to be more debate on Raines than there is IMO. Other than that I think these guys got it right. When you read some of these guys explanations for their votes it is really scary they get a vote at all. But I think that's probably the vocal idiot minority we often hear. I'd like to think a lot of these sportswriters do their homework and make informed decisions.

by Merry CRasmus on Jan 8, 2008 5:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

As far as Big Mac goes...

I'm a staunch defender of him and I think he's being punished by the writers for the first 5 years of his eligibility. Then they'll sneak him in after that. I'm fine with that as long as they do the same thing to Barry Bonds and, now, Roger Clemens. If you're going to punish one than you have to punish all, imo. Oh, and Rafael Palmeiro doesn't get in at all.

"I just wish that the late Harry Carey were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jan 8, 2008 6:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Congratulation to Goose

He deserves to be enshrined. A solid member of the club.

by liam on Jan 8, 2008 7:35 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

yeah

gossage should have been in a while back imho

i just cant believe raines didnt get at least 50% of the vote, next year henderson may get 99% or more, as the best leadoff hitter ever, and raines is prolly the second best leadoff hitter ever; is it montreal, or the cocaine thing, or the fact that he didnt get 3000 hits?

Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.

by bigcardsfan5 on Jan 8, 2008 11:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

My List

Blyleven: I think its been said enough times far more eloquently than I am capable of saying it.

Raines: One of the best leadoff hitters in history, an extremely efficient basestealer in an era where basestealing had a much larger role, career .385 OBP w/ a pretty damn good peak from 81-90. As an added bonus, he hung around for awhile longer and was still useful until about 1998.

Gossage: A true "fireman" with some absolutely devastating stuff. He was darn near unhittable from 75-85, and still effective for many seasons after that. His line in the strike-shortened 81 season is borderline video-game territory...a 461 ERA+!!!

Murphy: This one is close. I think I'll squeak him in based on a few things. One, he had 6 top-10 OPS seasons, finishing first or second 4 times. Two, he also finished first or second in HR 5 times, with a third and fourth place finish to go along with it. He was also a two-time MVP award winner, which despite its flaws isn't given out to total shlubs. Finally, his similiarity score list includes Duke Snider (2), Johnny Bench(6), and Gil Hodges(4). That's not too shabby. Overall, I really had an easier time saying this guy is a HOFer than I had saying he wasn't.

There are some borderline guys too: Mac, Rice, and Dawson. The knock on Dawson is the dreadful OBP (.323), which for a "feared power hitter" is pretty damning. Rice was a one-trick pony whose career numbers were very good, but were likely inflated by playing in the Fens. Being a dreadful defender doesn't help either.

And Mac...Well, the guy is certainly in by his numbers. The guy could hit the holy shit out of the ball, as evidenced by a gaudy 162 career OPS+. Even when he was hurt in 93-95 and 00-01, he was still awful productive when he managed to make it on to the field. But the whole steroid issue, as much as I hate to say it, is so damn complicated that I just don't know what to say. Both the pro and anti Mac camps make very good arguments, and so I guess that makes me a HUUUUUGGGGGGGGEEEE fence sitter when I say I just have to wait and see what comes out in the next few years before I truly weigh in. But I'll say it again...anyone who thinks his career wasn't HOF worthy needs to find a very sharp object and run very fast through a forest with it.

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 9, 2008 3:12 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Oh, and of course

Congrats to Goose. He's a worthy choice, I just kind of wish he could have been in sooner.

Oh, and finally, what in the name of all that is holy does Buck O'Neill have to do to get in the HOF? The fact that he wasn't put in 06 was shameful. Then the poor guy fucking passes on, and even THAT isn't good enough for the HOF voters to remove their heads from their asses and right a wrong! I don't even care about his career, name me one person who has done more for enlightening people about what was right about the game of baseball, and yet what has historically been so very very wrong about it. He was the first African-American coach in the MLB, he was a war veteran, he was a tremendous ambassador, he helped start the Negro League HOF, and of course he was a good player. So what is the damn hold up?

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 9, 2008 3:20 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

by bigcardsfan5 on Jan 9, 2008 11:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I can't wait

...to hear Joe Morgan rant about how unjust it was for Dave Concepcion to NOT make the HOF. The lack of logic coupled with the anger will be simply priceless!

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 9, 2008 4:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs