Could … no one get elected to the Hall of Fame this year?

48 Comments

Over at ESPN David Schoenfield points out something interesting. That while we’re all assuming that Barry Larkin — who got 62% of the vote last year — will be pushed over 75% of the vote and into the Hall of Fame this year, it’s not a mortal lock. At least if you look at the historic gains players who have notched 60%+ of the vote year-by-year have received:

While [being over 60% last year] is a positive sign for Larkin, as you can see from the above chart, not all the players made it immediately upon reaching 60 percent. The average percentage gain in election year for those 12 was 10.8 percent, so if Larkin receives that increase, he’ll fall just short.

Schoenfield thinks — as do I — that Larkin will top 75% this year and make it.  But man, I am sort of hung up on the possibility that he won’t now. Maybe I’m just overly prone to suggestion this morning.

Anyway, I’m wondering what it would mean for the Hall of Fame if we have a year — like we had back in 1996 — with no one elected.  This is especially intriguing in light of all of the worthy candidates that the Hall voters appear to be poised to pass on for now and the foreseeable future due to steroids stuff. It’s going to be bad enough a year from now when we’ll have likely established that the Hall of Fame has kept out the best hitter (Bonds) and pitcher (Clemens) of a generation.

If they’re also passing up guys like Larkin, I’ll really start to struggle to see the point of the place.

Orioles catcher Caleb Joseph: “We suck”

Getty Images
2 Comments

As I mentioned in the recaps this morning, Baltimore lost its 107th game last night, tying its 1988 mark for the most losses in Orioles history. They will certainly break that record and will almost certainly blast by the all-time franchise loss record of 111, set by the 1939 St. Louis Browns. That team only played a 154-game schedule so the O’s likely won’t be the worst team in the franchise’s 118-season history by winning percentage, but it’ll be close enough.

Over at The Athletic Dan Connolly reports that one Oriole, catcher Caleb Joseph, is well aware of how bad the Orioles are and he is not mincing words about it:

“I’m not a loser. So, to be associated with that severity of losing is embarrassing. It’s shameful really . . . I don’t blame [fans] at all [for not attending games]. We suck.”

That last bit was in response to Matt Olson of the Athletics coming up to him before a recent game, noticing how many empty seats there were in Camden Yards and asking Joseph if it was always like that. Let that sink in: a player for the Oakland Athletics who, year after year, have some of the worst attendance in baseball, is shocked at how poorly Baltimore is drawing.

As for Joseph, he spends a lot of time talking about how the attitude is all wrong with the Orioles, how there does not seem to be any accountability and how things weren’t like that when he came up back when the Orioles were winning. Which, well, yeah.

Baseball players often attribute winning and losing to whatever attitude is prevailing around the clubhouse. Maybe that’s true on greatly underachieving teams or borderline teams that aren’t catching the breaks, but it seems far more likely that winning makes teams happy and instills camaraderie while losing makes teams sad and makes people look inward. Players tend to get the causation wrong about all of that because, I suspect, they don’t want to admit that they’re not as talented as the competition so it has to come down to some motivational or mental defect. Which, if that makes a player feel better, fine, but these O’s weren’t going to win many games even if they came in with smiles on their faces while singing “Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah” out of their rear ends every day. They just aren’t good.

Whatever you think of all of that, one thing is clear: the O’s need to clean house in a major, major way.