Screw all these damn voters who have kept Baggy off their ballot. There's not ONE single shred of evidence that convicts Baggy. If the credentials that Thomas put up are worthy of FIRST ballot then there's NO reason at all that Baggy shouldn't already be in the HOF. I'm assuming these hypocrite voters will use their "guilt by association" on Jeter as well when he's on the ballot. Off the top of my head Jeter played with Giambi, Knobloch, ARod, Clemens, Pettitte, Kevin Brown, Ricky Bones, Jose Canseco, Bobby Estella, Jason Grimsley, Felix Heredia, Glenallen Hill, Darren Holmes, David Justice, Matt Lawton, Jim Leyritz, Sergio Mitre, Josias Manzanillo, Hal Morris, Denny Neagle, Mike Stanton, Randy Velarde, and Ron Villone. This yr Griffey, Baggy & Piazza "should" be going in. That said Baggy will get bypassed again.
For better or worse, Piazza gets an extra bump because he played catcher (although saying he "played catcher" is probably the more appropriate way to put it). Because his offensive numbers were so much better than just about everyone else who has ever played the position, I think he gets more serious consideration. I think I've said this before either in this thread or another, but I can't imagine Bagwell missing out on getting the call again this year. At this point, he just has far too many very public, very influential voters and media voices squarely behind him and those voices are getting louder with each passing year.
It's really just an embarrassment to the HOF itself. The fact that Bagwell is STILL not in the HOF is a huge hit to the credibility of the system.
Piazza's the greatest offensive catcher in baseball history; I really don't think where he played is a factor. I mean, he and Biggio came on the ballot the same year and Biggio has been out in front of him each year, including going in first.
Likely; but he should see his support grow significantly. As easy as it is to be angry with the voters, this really has been a ridiculously packed ballot the past few years and they've actually done well to unclog it. They've elected seven the past two years and Morris fell off. Those are a lot of votes, leaving just three players that garnered at least 50% support last year. My guess is Griffey and Piazza make it (which is also good for Bagwell; breaks the PED seal); Bagwell and Raines get closer; Hoffman gets way more votes than he should.
Gotta play 10 years. , the only reason I brought up Piazza in LA is because I seriously think that if Bagwell spent his career with the Dodgers and Piazza in Houston, their HOF support would switch as well.
Hey, "Buck" - we have user names for a reason, man....... I think the East/West Coast bias is way overblown. The BBWAA hasn't elected a true Dodger, in terms of years-served, since Don Sutton in 1998. And, frankly, they don't elect a lot of Yankees or Mets, either - not with any degree that would cause alarm. Piazza ranks 1st all-time, among catchers, in oWAR; OPS; OPS+; HRs; SLG%. He hit .308 for his career (which still means something to a lot of the voting block) and has some absolutely insane individual seasons. As great as Bagwell was, he doesn't outrank, offensively, virtually every first baseman that ever played. (Though he's among the best...) I find it very hard to believe, if voters favored Biggio - who played in Houston - over Piazza each of the three years they were on the ballot together, that switching Piazza and Bagwell would make a difference. Switching positions? Yes; that, I think, would make a difference. But slugging first basemen are far more common than slugging catchers.
It's a damn joke. Bagwell is head-and-shoulders the more complete baseball player than Frank Thomas. Unless one only cares about 1/3 of the game.
I'm not saying Thomas is better than Jeff (because he's not), but he does have some significant advantages over Pipes. 1) .300+ BA 2) 500+ HRs 3) an extra MVP 4) zero PED speculation Would be a shame if Biggio gets in, but not Jeff. Bagwell was better than him too.
Thomas had a .301 BA compared to Baggy's .297 Baggy was WAY better defensively and didn't have the luxury of DH'ing Baggy was a WAY better baserunner Baggy had a ROY to go with his MVP Also you hit on the head...."speculation"....and that's all it is!! I agree with you that Baggy was better then Biggio, and it's a DAMN shame that Biggio is in the HOF and Baggy isn't.
1) .301 vs .297 ? only an advantage for people who don't use their brain 2) counting stat. After 2005, they both had exactly 449. It's uncanny, in fact, how parallel their careers were (including sharing a birthday!) with the notable exceptions of Bagwell's five tools versus Thomas's two. 3) popularity contest. 4) BULL****
Hiding behind so-called "speculation" is a bunch of BS!!!! As I (and many others have noted) there isn't one piece of evidence linking Baggy to PED's. Wasn't on the Mitchell report, no link to BALCO, no former teammate has outed him, no dealer/supplier has outed him, neither of his ex wives has thrown him under the bus, there's no copies of checks or credit card receipts, etc etc. Just guilty by association, and again why I mentioned if these IDIOT voters who aren't voting for Baggy because of this they better hold Jeter to the same standard.
Had Bagwell totaled 31 more hits over his 15-year career - so, 2 hits a year - he would have hit .301, same as Frank Thomas. You'd be hard-pressed to cite 2 hits/year as an advantage, let a lone a "significant advantage." We broke down the whole Jeff Bagwell v. Frank Thomas debate. There's no rational explanation for one being in but not the other. Zero.
Batting .004 higher is not some huge advantage. It's the fact one average is ".300" while they other is below. Voters and stat geeks like the roundness of .300 similar to 300 (wins), 500 (HRs), 3000 (hits), etc. If the players shared the same .004 discrepancy but they were *both* either below or above .300, it wouldn't matter as much.
I don't disagree that it's a "perception" issue - but it's so monumentally stupid and lazy (speaking to BBWAA members; not you) to draw that line and not do an ounce of due diligence. Fifteen more hits does not (or should not) strengthen Bagwell's case.
