So what happened lower down on the Hall of Fame ballot?

37 Comments

Hooray for Barry Larkin. Now let’s look farther down the ballot and see what’s what.  We’ll do this in random notes format:

  • Jack Morris’ uptick from 53.5% in 2011 to 66.7% this year is, on the surface, a good thing for his candidacy. Not many guys who get that many votes fail to make it. So on one level you’d think he’d be a shoe-in for next year.  The problem, however, is that so many worthy candidates — and candidates who will got lots of support but who maybe not enough for election — will be coming in next two years. And Morris only has two years.  It’s possible that he will become the place where all of the anti-steroid voters go next year, thus pushing him over. It’s also possible that he just missed his last best chance to get in before he’s crowded out;
  • Jeff Bagwell’s elevation from 41.7% to 56% is quite encouraging, both for him personally and for the idea that people who are unfairly lumped in with PED users may actually get a fair shake eventually. Perhaps the real anti-Bagwell sentiment from last year was about making him a first ballot Hall of Famer, not keeping him out entirely.  Either way, with 56% in only his second year on the ballot, his prospects look pretty darn good going forward;
  • Speaking of forward, Tim Raines took a nice leap forward as well, going from 37.5% in 2011 to 48.7% this year. Still no lock — you really need to bust 50% before you get real momentum — but encouraging all the same. It will be interesting to see, however, if he gets crowded out in the coming years like Morris may due to the overcrowded ballots.  Of course, Raines still has another decade on the ballot, so his situation is not as precarious as is Morris’.
  • Lee Smith broke 50% — he got 50.6% — but it wasn’t a big leap over last year’s 45.3%.  Not terrible, but no one really seems to be advocating for him publicly like they did for Bert Blyleven, and no one seems as agitated by is presence like they are by Morris’. Could he be flattening out? We’ll see, as he has five more years before he is the Veteran’s Committee’s problem.
  • Mark McGwire has certainly plateaued at a meager 19.5%. Last year he had 19.8%.  Even those who advocate for the PED guys are going to overlook him somewhat in the interests of pushing for Barry Bonds’ and Roger Clemens’ candidacies going forward, so don’t look for McGwire to make any moves.
  • Alan Trammell shot up 12 percentage points over last year, but he’s still only at 36.8%, so it’s not like his is a vibrant candidacy. Trammell leapfrogged Edgar Martinez, actually, who only went up from 32.9% to 36.5%. In other news, if anyone can tell me what separates Trammell from Larkin that is in any way material, I’d really like to know.
  • Juan Gonzalez dropped off completely, receiving only 4% of the vote. All of that desktop publishing effort, wasted.
  • We made fun of the Pedro Gomez’ vote for Bill Mueller this morning, but Mueller actually got four votes. Other novelty vote recipients: Vinny Castilla (6), Tim Salmon (5), Brad Radke (2), Javy Lopez (1) and Eric Young (1).  Nice going, guys. Now you can tell people that you got Hall of Fame votes from writers who did not take their task particularly seriously.

There’s a lot more fun stuff to be gleaned from the voting results.  Check ’em out and add any of your own observations in the comments.

New bill to build Athletics stadium on Las Vegas Strip caps Nevada’s cost at $380 million

D. Ross Cameron-USA TODAY Sports
1 Comment

CARSON CITY, Nev. — A bill introduced in the Nevada Legislature would give the Oakland Athletics up to $380 million for a potential 30,000 seat, $1.5 billion retractable roof stadium on the Las Vegas Strip.

The bulk of the public funding would come from $180 million in transferable tax credits from the state and $120 million in county bonds, which can vary based on interest rate returns. Clark County also would contribute $25 million in credit toward infrastructure costs.

The A’s have been looking for a home to replace Oakland Coliseum, where the team has played since arriving from Kansas City for the 1968 season. The team had sought to build a stadium in Fremont, San Jose and finally the Oakland waterfront, all ideas that never materialized.

The plan in the Nevada Legislature won’t directly raise taxes. It can move forward with a simply majority vote in the Senate and Assembly. Lawmakers have a little more than a week to consider the proposal before they adjourn June 5, though it could be voted on if a special session is called.

The Athletics have agreed to use land on the southern end of the Las Vegas Strip, where the Tropicana Las Vegas casino resort sits. Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao has said he is disappointed the team didn’t negotiate with Oakland as a “true partner.”

Las Vegas would be the fourth home for a franchise that started as the Philadelphia Athletics from 1901-54. It would become the smallest TV market in Major League Baseball and the smallest market to be home to three major professional sports franchises.

The team and Las Vegas are hoping to draw from the nearly 40 million tourists who visit the city annually to help fill the stadium. The 30,000-seat capacity would make it the smallest MLB stadium.

MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred said a vote on the Oakland Athletics’ prospective move to Las Vegas could take place when owners meet June 13-15 in New York.

The plan faces an uncertain path in the Nevada Legislature. Democratic leaders said financing bills, including for the A’s, may not go through if Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoes the five budget bills, which he has threatened to do as many of his priorities have stalled or faded in the Democratic-controlled Legislature.

Under the bill, the Clark County Board of Commissioners would create a homelessness prevention and assistance fund along the stadium’s area in coordination with MLB and the Nevada Resort Association. There, they would manage funds for services, including emergency rental and utility assistance, job training, rehabilitation and counseling services for people experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

The lease agreement with the Las Vegas Stadium Authority would be up for renewal after 30 years.

Nevada’s legislative leadership is reviewing the proposal, Democratic state Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager said in a statement.

“No commitment will be made until we have both evaluated the official proposal and received input from interested parties, including impacted community members,” Yeager said.