The ten vote limit on Hall of Fame ballots is a real problem

37 Comments

If I had to bet I’d say that two players make the Hall of Fame this year: Jack Morris and Craig Biggio. But it would not shock me at all if no one made it in.

One big reason is the anti-PED people with ballots. Another big reason, and one that hurts those who are not suspected of PED use more than the PED users, is the ten-vote limit the BBWAA places on the ballot. ESPN’s Jim Caple notes just how vexing a problem this is:

Since the Hall of Fame began, the maximum number of players for whom a writer can vote has been 10. The number of teams has almost doubled in that span, which means the number of potential Hall of Fame candidates has also nearly doubled. Actually, when you consider that African-American, Latino and other minority players weren’t allowed to play when the Hall of Fame opened, Hall-caliber candidates have likely more than doubled.

And yet, the maximum remains 10. For no apparent reason. Is it any wonder so many writers have trouble with the game’s advanced metrics?

The fallout of the 10-player maximum is that I no longer can simply vote for the players I think belong in the Hall of Fame. I now have to vote with an agenda, just like a politician.

Caple’s potential ballot is massive, and includes a lot of people you or I may not vote for. But the problem is that he does not get the option to make such choices, and as a result has to leave off people who he thinks are genuinely worthy.

Makes very little sense to begin with, and now that we have potential first-ballot guys like Clemens and Bonds hanging around for years, clogging up the ballot, it makes the problem even worse.

Mike Trout has been really good at baseball lately

Getty Images
Leave a comment

“Water wet,” “Sky blue,” “Dog bites man” and “Mike Trout good” are not exactly newsworthy sentiments, but once in a while you have to state the obvious just so you can look back later and make sure you were, in the moment, aware of the obvious.

And to be fair, “Mike Trout good” is underselling the Angels outfielder lately. He’s on the greatest tear of his great career lately, and dang it, that’s worthy of a few words on this blog.

Last night Trout went a mere 1-for-1, but that’s because the Diamondbacks were smart enough not to pitch to him too much, walking him twice. There was no one on base the first time he came up and he got a free pass. There was a guy on first but two outs the second time, so he was once again not given much to hit and took his base again. Arizona was not so lucky the third time. The bases were loaded and there was nowhere to put Trout. He smacked the first pitch he saw for a two-run single. They probably shoulda just walked him anyway, limiting the damage to one. The last time up he reached on catcher’s interference. Maybe Arizona figured that literally grabbing the bat from him with a catcher’s mitt was the best bet?

If so you can’t blame them, really. Not with the month he’s had. In June, Trout is hitting .448/.554/.776 with five homers. He currently leads the league in the following categories: home runs (23), runs (60), walks (64), on-base percentage (.469), OPS (1.158) OPS+ (219), total bases (179) and intentional walks (9). He currently has a bWAR of 6.5. WAR, in case you did not know, is a cumulative stat. When he won the 2014 MVP Award, he “only” had 7.6 for the entire year.

Sadly, one man does not a team make, so the Angels are only 9-8 in the month of June and have fallen far back of the red-hot Houston Astros and Seattle Mariners in the division race. For this reason I suspect a lot of people are going to do what they’ve long done and overlook Mike Trout’s sheer dominance or, even more ridiculously, claim he is overrated or something (believe me, I’ve seen it even this month).

Feel free to ignore those people and concentrate instead on the greatest baseball player in the game today, who has somehow managed to up his game in recent weeks.