The Hall Of Fame voting is in, and it's not all that exciting.  I'm glad that Goose Gossage finally got in, because it was a travesty to have Fingers, Eckersley, and (especially) Sutter in there before him.  (Quick, look at Bruce Sutter's career stats, and then compare them to Doug Jones'.)

This really isn't the point.  Gossage was one of the greatest relievers ever, and now he's in the Hall of Fame.  There are other players of note who did not get in, however, and I am going to get my nerd on in response.

Let's start with the snubs.

1) Tim Raines: Ok, we get it.  He's not Rickey Henderson.  Totally right.  But the Rock was an amazing player in his own right.  Let's examine the knocks on Raines:

MYTH: He was never an elite player.

FACT:  Hogwash!  I will steal the argument used by many a Jim Rice supporter, and highlight Raines' 12-year "prime," 1982-1993.  He ranks 3rd in all of MLB in Runs Created over that span, behind only Wade Boggs and The Rickey, and ahead of Eddie Murray, Ryne Sandberg, Cal Ripken, Paul Molitor, Robin Yount, and George Brett.  These are all elite players through their prime years.  Even if we measure the same stretch by OPS+, which undervalues Raines' excellent OBP and completely ignores his sensational baserunning, Raines finishes 14th in MLB, just behind Molitor, Dave Winfield, and Tony Gwynn, and comfortably ahead of Robin Yount, Kirk Gibson, Kirby Puckett, and Andre Dawson.

MYTH: Raines was one of many prolific basestealers from the 1980s, but several others (Henderson, Vince Coleman) were better than he.

Fact: Wrong again!  Since World War II, there have been two players to steal more bases than Raines: Henderson and Lou Brock.  However, Henderson was caught 335 times, Brock 307, while Raines only 146.  Going down the list, the next player with fewer than 150 times caught stealing is Ozzie Smith, who stole 238 bases fewer than Raines, and was still caught twice more in his career.  Raines has the best SB% of all-time for any player with at least 400 career stolen bases.  A very reasonable argument could be made that Raines was the best baserunner in MLB history.

Why does Raines have so much trouble getting support?  Because his best years were as a Montreal Expo, and there simply aren't enough Jonah Keris in this world to support him.  Furthermore, if he hadn't hung around as a valuable part-time player through his late 30's, people would have remembered him better.
 

2) Bert Blyleven: My big problem with Blyleven not being in the Hall is that every knock on the guy seems to be related to the number of games he did or did not win.  Frankly wins and losses are stats that are completely meaningless to me when evaluating individuals.  Blyleven ranked in the top 10 in VORP in all of baseball 7 times in his career, as early as 1973 (3rd, behind Jim Palmer and Tom Seaver) and as late as 1989 (second, behind Bret Saberhagen).  His career Warp3 is over 146.  He's 5th all-time in strikeouts.  Enough is enough, people.  Put Bert in the Hall.
 

3) Alan Trammell: Trammell was (apparently) a very good defensive shortstop, while also being a very good hitter at a time when there simply were not good hitting shortstops.  Over the course of Trammell's career (1977-1996), there were 5 shortstops who were average or better hitters with at least 3000 plate appearances during that stretch.  Trammell ranks third, behind Barry Larkin and Cal Ripken, who both began their declines AFTER Trammell retired.  His career Warp3 is just a shade under 130.  Trammell's numbers clearly look less impressive due to the emergence of shortstop as a legitimate offensive position (It's A-Rod's Fault), but his numbers need to be taken within the context that they were produced.  That makes him a Hall of Famer in my book.
 

4) Mark McGwire: I don't know how many or which players did steroids, and I don't know how much (if at all) it helped them.  As it were, I'm going strictly by what actually occurred during the baseball games of the Steroid Era.  You may disagree with me about McGwire being Hall-worthy, but that's simply a philosophical disagreement, and that is not my strong suit.
 

Moving on to those who didn't and shouldn't get in.

1) Jim Rice: Yeah, yeah, I don't like Rice because he played for Boston, whatever.  He also wasn't all that good.  By now you've heard that his road numbers were very pedestrian (.277/.330/.459), that he was a poor fielder and baserunner, and that his most impressive skill was hitting into double plays.  He hit poorly in the playoffs, he was ornery and obnoxious, and he ceased to be a productive player before his 34th birthday.  Rice (with his career Warp3 of 83.2 )might legitimately be the worst Hall of Famer elected by the BBWAA when he gets in next year.
 

2) Dale Murphy: One of the very best players in all of baseball throughout the 1980's, showing power, patience, speed, and a great glove in center field.  Not to mention, he was a heck of a nice guy.  But he hit his 30's, and they hit back. The Murph was essentially done as a ballplayer at age 32.  Career Warp3: 85.7.  Sorry, Murph.
 

3) Andre Dawson: Dawson has the best case of any of the players in this group.  He was one of the best home run hitters in the National League, he was, by all accounts, an exceptional fielder, and he had the kind of overall athleticism that reminds even the nerdiest nerd that baseball can be fun.  Unfortunately, he also had a .323 career OBP.  This is a huge hole in his game.  That being said, he does have a career Warp3 of 105.3, so I would not be furious if he got in, even though I wouldn't vote for him.
 

4) Jack Morris: Morris had an amazing game in the World Series.  A 10-inning shutout to clinch a championship?  Amazing.  Incredible.  Clutch.  Free pass into the Hall of Fame?  Not so fast.  Career ERA+ of 105, and he only topped 130 once, in a season where he made only 27 starts.  Career Warp3 of 90.4, leaving him well short.

Questions?  Comments?  Other?  I do not discriminate at peter.bard@gmail.com