I heard Richard Justice on the radio last night talking about Bagwell. He says other writers are tight lipped about Bagwell, but there is SOMETHING that enough of them believe that makes him a total zero starter for them. He's not sure if it is solely the PEDs or not, but a lot of writers apparently are 100% against Bagwell. Charlie P said it sounds like Bags might see his total FALL this year.
I think there's zero to none momentum on Bagwell getting in. His initial vote tally may have indicated he'd have a better shot at year 2 or 3, but I don't see anything out there to "help" his cause... and there's enough suspicion that I could only see voters who initially voted for him now not voting for him (vs. the other way around). The only thing that would actually work in his favor is if another "suspected" player garnered enough support to get in... and the way things are going now, I doubt that will ever happen. I also don't think the writers suspect Frank Thomas as being a user... and that doesn't help Bagwell's cause.
His vote total might fall. Incredibly stacked ballot will be the reasoning. If it does fall it won't be by much.
I'm beginning to think it's a fear he's on the same sad journey as Caminiti... Barry Bloom explicitly mentioned it in his email to me, and I've even had some experience with it myself having worked with the team. I would guess the Brown trial, combined with the PED whispers, are killing Bagwell's chances right now.
Sure... but only if the other suspected players start to garner support as well (including the main culprits of Bonds/Clemens).
It's looking like Piazza is going to end up with roughly 70% this year so he probably goes in next year. He and Bagwell are in the exact same boat: suspected with zero proof. So that's encouraging. Unfortunately, there's still a too-large segment that, PEDs aside, simply don't believe Bagwell is Hall worthy; that's the other issue (along with the fallout from the Brown trial; deck is stacked against the guy...). I've gone on a mad email campaign to try and sway opinions. Statistically, he's inarguably HoF worthy. He would do wonders for his candidacy with a very well-publicized rehab, I think.
Maybe next year shakes out to be better for Bags. Only Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and John Smoltz would be close to 1st year locks.
The one thing I don't get is bonds would have been a 1st ballot guy without the steroids. Why keep him out.
His way with the media. His constant denials despite overwhelming evidence. The fact that he owns the 2 biggest records in the game, but (likely) got there by cheating. He, McGwire, Sosa, and Palmiero likely will never get in.
To be honest, I get that Cammy vibe with Bagwell too. But I don't think the voters care about whispers of him being an alcoholic / womanizer. As far as the PED stuff, people are putting 2 and 2 together and making their own decisions. If I was voting, even though I kinda suspect Bagwell too, I wouldn't hold it against him unless some compelling information came out on him and PED's. Can you share your experiences with Bagwell?
That is awesome Hey Now. And pretty damn cool on his part as well. I think I said it last year, but nice job taking the time to respond at length--not easy to do without getting annoyed at some point (which would have turned him off)
Biggio is at 78.4%. He dropped 2% in last year from the The 2013 HOF Ballot Collecting Gizmo to actual vote. Assuming the drop off is similar he should get in. http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/newsstand
I fully expect Biggio to be snubbed again and have no hope that Bagwell will ever get in. I hope the building burns to the ground.
Unfortunately, I fear it's much worse than just that. I think the greatest fear currently derailing the HoF is the idea of electing someone who is subsequently proven to have used PEDs. In Bagwell's case... if you couple that with the scary thought of him also potentially falling victim to his demons... I think he's a really giant scary, stay-away candidate right now for a lot of voters. (Again, I'm just trying to get into the mindset of the voter; this is all speculative on my part. I'm not trying to implicate the guy at all.) Oh, you know - mostly pretty standard stuff: irresponsible, erratic. Anything more specific than that would betray confidence.
For some reason, I'm almost giddy with the potential of Biggio going in to the hall today. I guess it's just the idea of someone I grew up watching and cheering for regularly making it to the hall. I've paid attention the vote for as long as I can remember, but this is the first time I've been this excited about it. I'm surprised how much I'm wired up about the vote this year.
I agree with your views. I had heard about Bagwell being in rehab a few years ago and that coke head ho he is with now came to pick him up early. Bagwell looked awful the day he was arguing with reporters after coming out of the courthouse with her. He appears to be living a hard life. My personal opinion... Steroids give you the ability for your muscles to recover quickly from fatigue and that allowed Bagwell to maximize opportunities to lift weights. Problem became that the steroids did nothing to help his shoulder take the wear and tear of that frequent and intense weight training. Kinda like the time Cammy was running the bases and one of his tendons just snapped. Ligaments and tendons can't take that kind of abuse. That said, it's just an opinion and there are likely people in the hall that did steroids too. I'd vote for him to get in, if I had a vote just because he's been retired for a while and no compelling PED dirt has been thrown his way. Understood and I respect you for that.
