Player Total Votes Percentage
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%
Don Mattingly 86 15.8%
Dave Parker 82 15.1%
Dale Murphy 75 13.8%
Harold Baines 28 5.2%
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%
Stottlemyre gets a vote and Rijo doesnt?
Jim Rice gets screwed again. What a joke these writers are.
Rice gets screwed? He doesn't belong in the HOF and will get in next year.
The biggest problem is Raines only getting 24%. He's better than Rice and Dawson and if compared favorably to the average LF already in the HOF.
Back to Rice- KT's take:
EDIT- and he's a Red Sox fan...4. Rice. An absolutely dominant hitter for a decade in Boston. Like Morris, I think, Rice loses points on personality. And that's not right.
You know nobody loves Jim Ed more than I. But again...he just wasn't as dominant as everyone says he was. Look for yourself. It's true. He was awesome for like 3-4 years, but then his eyesight went south -- which maybe Heyman thinks should work in his favor -- and he had injuries and stuff. Then he had a resurgence later as a DH, but it was too late, and he was done at like 33.
People always say that Rice was "the most feared" and the "scariest guy to see at the plate" and stuff...but for many of the years he played, he wasn't actually the best hitter, or player, on his own team. Look at Rice, and now look at Dewey. And remember that Rice was not the greatest OF, and that he DHed a lot, and that Dewey was an excellent RF. Why Dewey doesn't get more love for the Hall I'll never know. I don't think he should be in, but he never even sniffs a "Consider This Guy" article, and Jim Ed gets them all the time.
Anyway, the point is, Jim Ed = no, not quite, sorry. Love you. First Sox jersey was 14. Saw you hit a mammoth HR at Fenway in 1984 that might still be airborne. Just didn't play long enough, or well enough.
Those are the only HOF's from that list in my book.
Why is he even on the list?
SECOND PLACE DOESN'T CONCERN ME
Every one of the players on the above list down to Baines deserves some consideration. The guys getting 1 or 2 votes are mainly just writers doing it as a favor or as a joke. If I'm not mistaken, getting no votes on the ballot means getting taken off the ballot permanently even if it is your 1st year on it.
IMO, Gossage was a no-brainer. But then again, so is Rice, Lee and Raines.
Blyleven is a tougher call. He played on some pretty bad teams but put up some pretty darned good numbers for a long period. I'd say he'll get in eventually but it'll take some politicking on his part.
Andre Dawson...another tough call. He was great, but I just don't think he warrants it.
Jack Morris, Tommy John...nope and nope. Concepcion should've been in a while ago. I think the veteran's will vote him in.
McGuire...another tough call. In terms of sheer stats, he's a no-brainer. But with the promise of those stats all being tainted...I'm a bit torn on that. Considering the fact that baseball has already screwed the pooch on the whole steroids issue, I think they should just ignore the morals of the issue and go with the numbers alone and just try to eliminate them from here on out. But with that view being taken...where we ignore the moral of the issue and just go with the stats....then it's also a no-brainer that Pete Rose gets in. If you keep Rose out due to the moral implications of his actions over-riding his statistical prowess...then you must also keep out the 'roiders.
Nobody else on the list should even be in consideration. Yes...even Rijo. Not a SHOT.
The whole system is a joke if you ask me. If you dont make it your first year, why are you even eligble again; your retired, what did you do over the last year to improve to earn it this year as opposed to last year. I think one year, 2 max, then wait a few for the vets commmitee for any oversights. The current system, IMO, takes away from the value of the Hall.
I agree completely. If the voters aren't quite sure if a player merits induction...then he simply DOESN'T warrant induction. A hall of fame has little meaning if borderline players get in. I mean, if he was "pretty good"...then he shouldn't be in the same club as Aaron, Ruth and Mays now should he?