MLB Hall of Fame Induction: Who Deserves a Place in Cooperstown in 2010?

1 of 15

When Andre Dawson was announced as the sole member of the 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame class, it caused quite a stir, to say the least. After perhaps the most controversial balloting in recent memory, fans, and writers took to their keyboards to voice their frustrations.

How did Dawson, who played his last game in 1996, become more worthy of enshrinement in 2010 than he had been in 2009? Was one incident with an umpire enough to snub the legendary Roberto Alomar? Will Bert Blyleven ever catch a break?

Two days after the results were announced, I offered my solution to the problem: an end to secret ballots for Hall of Fame voting. I wanted to know why several deserving players were snubbed (especially Alomar, my childhood hero), while some idiot voters thought schmucks like David Segui and Eric Karros were worthy of sending to Cooperstown.

Thanks to Bleacher Report's Featured Columnists, my dream has been realized. This week's poll was a mock Hall of Fame vote, with participants who were happy to share (and explain) their opinions with the world.

The winner (we too elected only one player to Cooperstown, but it wasn't Dawson) and the Top 10 also-rans are featured in this slideshow, each with two explanations from different FC's: one from a voter who picked him, the other from someone who didn't. The full vote totals are listed at the end.

As a reminder, players have to get 75 percent of the vote to earn a spot in Cooperstown—there's no curve and you can't round up. With 22 people voting in this poll, a player had to be named on at least 17 ballots to earn immortality.

Thanks so much to everyone who participated! If you voted for someone who didn't get enough support to be featured in the slideshow, I'd love to see your explanation in the comments.

Note: I sent this survey only to the Featured Columnists who have been active in previous polls. If you are a new FC or you have changed your mind about wanting to participate, send me a message and I'll be sure to keep you in the loop for next time!

Andre Dawson: OUT

How he did: 68.2 percent
Real-life: 77.9 percent

Why he got Joel Reuter's vote:

Dawson was the definition of a five-tool player, and there was nothing that he did not do well when he was in is prime. He was a consistent 20-20 player with a cannon arm and range to match.

Had he not ruined his knees on the artificial turf in Montreal, his late career numbers would have been even better, but as it was he won an MVP for a last place Cubs team while playing on two hobbled knees. Pretty impressive stuff from a deserving Hall of Famer.

Why he didn't get Aaron Hooks':

The Hall of Fame is not the Hall of Very Good. Andre "The Hawk" Dawson was a very good player for Montreal and Chicago, but failed to cross many of the thresholds that would normally earn a player passage into Hall of Fame.

When did Mr. Dawson transcend his sport? When did he capture the collective breath of the baseball world? 62 HRs short of 500, and 226 hits short of 3,000 shouldn’t be good enough for the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) to induct him into the same place as Stan Musial, Babe Ruth, and others also reside.

Barry Larkin: OUT

How he did: 63.6 percent
Real-life: 51.6 percent

Why he got Cameron Britt's vote:

Current HOF member Ryne Sandberg (.285/.344/.452, 282 HR, 344 SB—10 All-Star selections, one MVP award) and soon-to-be shoo-in Derek Jeter (.315/.386/.456, 232 HR, 314 SB—11 All-Star selections) both have epitomized the “elite” middle infielder of this era.

By that standard, Barry Larkin has to be in Cooperstown.

Larkin had a career that spanned three decades and saw him accumulate 12 All-Star selections, one MVP honor, and a career line of .295/.371/.444, along with 198 homers and 379 stolen bases. He saw batting averages under .279 only thrice in 19 seasons—that’s what a true HOFer brings to the table.

Why he didn't get Bob Warja's:

Larkin’s .295/.371/.444/.815 slash is well above average especially for a shortstop, but he didn’t do anything spectacular that jumps out at anyone. He was a steady, consistent performer who played above average defense, had some pop, and was an effective base stealer.

That may eventually be good enough at such a premium position as short, but it doesn’t seem worthy of first or second ballot nomination and much better players than he have had to wait a long time for entry.

Edgar Martinez: OUT

How he did: 59.1 percent
Real-life: 36.2 percent

Why he got Dave Hampton's vote:

People use many excuses as reasons to exclude Edgar Martinez from the Hall of Fame, but no one can dispute his career batting stats: 512 doubles, 309 HRs, 1261 RBI .312 average, and 1283 walks—higher than his career strikeout total.

He’s one of only eight players to accumulate a .300-plus average, 300-plus HRs, 500-plus doubles, .400-plus OBP, .500-plus SLG%; the others are named Ruth, Gehrig, Hornsby, Williams, Helton, Ramirez, and Musial. Not bad company.

Why he didn't get Joel Reuter's:

Martinez is a tough case for the Hall of Fame voters, as he is the first worthy player who played the majority of his career as a designated hitter.

Some advocates for Martinez’s enshrinement point to players like Ozzie Smith and Bill Mazeroski as guys who were similarly one-dimensional in that they were supreme fielders but lacked much in the way of offense.

However, the fact of the matter is that while Martinez was a great hitter, he was never the best hitter in the league and is not viewed as one of the best hitters of all time. He’s certainly not first-ballot material.

Tim Raines: OUT

How he did: 45.5 percent
Real-life: 30.4 percent

Why he got Joe Regan's vote:

Tony Gwynn was a .338 hitter in San Diego. However, he had mediocre power, and walked in only 7.7 percent of his plate appearances. His career wRC+ was 134 and he earned a career WAR of 67.9. He was elected in the first ballot.

Tim Raines was only a .294 hitter, but walked in 12.8 percent of his plate appearances, and was a better power hitter. While Gwynn was a good basestealer (319 SB, 71.8 percent success rate), Raines trumped him (808 SB, 84.7 percent success rate). Raines’ career wRC+ was 137, and his WAR was 71.0. He has yet to be elected.

Why he didn't get Samantha Bunten's:

Raines has a decent case for Cooperstown; he reached base almost 4,000 times in his career. The problem is 1,330 of the times he wound up on first came as a result of walks. That leaves him seriously short of the 3,000 hits that are considered the benchmark for a ticket to Cooperstown.

Sure, there are exceptions to the 3,000-hit standard, but Raines’ slow finish to his career didn’t help with that. His numbers tapered off a lot in his 30s and he had trouble staying healthy. A great player, sure. But a Hall of Famer? No way.

Fred McGriff: OUT

How he did: 31.8 percent
Real-life: 21.5 percent

Why he got Asher Chancey's vote:

Simply put, Fred McGriff was a throw-back to the 1980s. Sure, his career carried into the 21st Century, but his prime came in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Consider this: McGriff led his league in home runs, with less than 40, two different times; if he’d made his debut 10 years later, those would have been 50-homer seasons. Still, he ended up with 493 career home runs, which simply must be considered Hall of Fame-caliber by any standard.

Why he didn't get Jeremiah Graves':

McGriff didn’t play lights out defense at first base and wasn’t much of a situational hitter. It was often an all or nothing approach. He didn’t win any MVP awards and never finished higher than fourth in the balloting.

Additionally, he did most of his damage during the steroid era. McGriff may have never touched the stuff in his life, but if guys like Mark McGwire—whose reputation is also based largely on power and little else—aren’t in, then I can’t justify admitting McGriff into Cooperstown either.

Mark McGwire: OUT

How he did: 27.3 percent
Real-life: 23.7 percent

Why he got Lewie Pollis' vote:

He’s no role model and there’s no condoning steroid use, but the fact of the matter is that he didn’t break any rules. As The West Wing’s President Bartlet once asked, “Are we discarding anybody else for legal activities?”

Taking steroids to bulk up was wrong, but it’s not technically cheating if it’s not prohibited (unlike the spitballs thrown by Gaylord Perry, and he’s in the Hall of Fame). Allowing dopers would stain Cooperstown’s legacy, but it’s what Major League Baseball deserves for dragging its feet on PEDs for so long.

Why he didn't get Nick Cafferky's:

Now that the players that played during the steroid era are beginning to be eligible for the Hall, there is the question of how to vote on them. My solution: Ignore home runs and slugging percentage and instead look at batting average and fielding.

Guys like Barry Bonds and A-Rod were/are the best in all of these areas as well as home runs and deserve to be in Cooperstown. With McGwire, you have a career .263 hitter and just an average fielder. Sorry Big Mac, you aren’t even close in my eyes.

Lee Smith: OUT

How he did: 27.3 percent
Real-life: 47.3 percent

Why he got Joe Regan's vote:

The standard of “closers” has been set as Bruce Sutter, and Lee Smith clearly surpassed Sutter’s career. Smith was one of the best relievers in baseball for a decade, accumulating 25.3 WAR (per baseball-reference.com) in his peak decade of 1982-1991—better than Sutter's entire career.

Smith’s workload was also impeccable, pitching over 100 innings solely in relief for consecutive seasons. Plus, he struck out almost a batter per inning during his career (8.73 K/9 rate), and also kept the ball in the park well with a career 0.62 HR/9.

Why he didn't get Bob Warja's:

To me, Lee Smith is a questionable HOF candidate because saves are such a questionable stat and sheer number of saves shouldn’t automatically qualify someone for the honor. Smith lost 21 more games than he won and had 103 blown saves.

The stat is so overrated that to make the HOF a closer needs to add something else besides saves, such as also having been a good starter (Eck, Smoltz), pioneered a unique pitch (Sutter), or held some other distinction of note.

Don Mattingly: OUT

How he did: 13.6 percent
Real-life: 16.1 percent

Why he got Jeremiah Graves' vote:

Mattingly was an absolute beast through the ‘80s and early ‘90s on both sides of the ball. He was an offensive powerhouse who hit for power and average, while serving as a major run producer in the midst of some very forgettable Yankees teams.

All the while he played steady defense that earned him nine Gold Glove awards. “Donny Ballgame” was also a six-time All-Star, a three-time Silver Slugger, and—despite being in the mix nearly every year, a one-time American League MVP following his monster 1985 campaign.

Why he didn't get Dan Tylicki's:

Mattingly no doubt had a great peak to his career, but did not do much after due to injury. Last I checked, having five or so good years doesn’t guarantee someone a Hall of Fame spot.

His stats are very good, but compared to others at his position like Cecil Cooper and Wally Joyner, who I don’t think anyone would consider Hall worthy, they don’t measure up. Plus, Gold Gloves for a first baseman don’t mean all that much.

Alan Trammell: OUT

How he did: 13.6 percent
Real-life: 22.4 percent

Why he got Asher Chancey's vote:

When you think of Hall of Fame shortstops, who do you think of? Ozzie Smith, Phil Rizzuto, Honus Wagner. Well, Alan Trammell was no Honus Wagner, but he could play rings around both Rizzuto and Smith.

In 20 seasons with the Tigers, Trammell won four Gold Gloves and three Silver Sluggers. He also scored over 1,100 runs and drove in just over 1,000 runs, and his 1987 season was one of the greatest non-Wagner shortstop seasons of all time.

Why he didn't get Aaron Hooks':

You don’t have pretty good seasons for 19 years and claim to be a Hall of Famer. Trammell was an All-Star six times in 19 years. He was a Gold Glove winner four times in 19 years. He was a .285 hitter with 185 home runs in 19 years. I had to think hard to remember he was a Detroit Tiger.

Ernie Banks or Trammell? Ozzie Smith or Trammell? Cal Ripken Jr. or Trammell? To gain entry to the HOF, you may not have to be better than the guys already in. But you better damn well have a case on some level.

Bert Blyleven: OUT

How he did: 72.7 percent
Real-life: 74.2 percent

Why he got Jordan Schwartz' vote:

Often considered the best pitcher without a plaque in Cooperstown, the right-hander ranks ninth on the all-time shutout list with 60. Blyleven is the only pitcher in the top 20 of that statistic who is not in the Hall of Fame. The longtime Minnesota Twin racked up 3,701 strikeouts, fifth on the all-time list. Among eligible players in the top 17, Blyleven is the only one not enshrined.

In the end, it may be 13 wins that separate the pitcher from induction. His career total of 287 victories ranks him 27th all time, but 300 is the magic number for the Hall.

Why he didn't get Aaron Hooks':

Blyleven was a good pitcher for a great amount of time—21 seasons to be exact. When you do anything for 21 years, accumulation begins, and skews the impact gathering those things has. Blyleven has 287 wins! He also has 250 losses.

Time balances stats in baseball, and just because a player is blessed with relatively good health over a long period of time doesn’t mean that person should be considered one of the all-time greats of his sport.

Roberto Alomar: IN

How he did: 90.9 percent
Real-life: 73.7 percent

Why he got Lewie Pollis' vote:

Robbie Alomar won’t just be remembered as one of the game’s best second basemen, but as one of the most complete five-tool men in baseball history.

Want a good fielder? He won 10 Gold Gloves from 1991-2001 and teamed with Omar Vizquel to make one of the best double-play duos of all time. A solid hitter? He earned four Silver Sluggers. A postseason leader? He made the playoffs seven times and won two rings.

Alomar’s 68.2 career WAR ranks 99th all time, ahead of legends like Hank Greenberg and Jackie Robinson and handily beating Ryne Sandberg, who is widely regarded as the gold standard for second basemen.

Why he didn't get Dennis Schlossman's:

It’s extremely unfortunate for Roberto Alomar that the focal point of his entire career revolves around the infamous incident in 1996 with umpire John Hirschbeck.

Although it’s questionable what criteria the Baseball Writers of America consider most when casting their votes, character and class are sometimes at the top of the list—two virtues that aren’t exactly synonymous with Alomar’s name.

Not voting for him on the 2010 ballot is enough of a statement to emphasize his not-so-perfect values and morality.

Full Results

Roberto Alomar—20
Bert Blyleven—16
Andre Dawson—15
Barry Larkin—14
Edgar Martinez—13
Tim Raines—10
Fred McGriff—7
Mark McGwire—6
Lee Smith—6
Harold Baines—3
Don Mattingly—3
Jack Morris—3
Alan Trammell—3
Dave Murphy—2
Robin Ventura—2
Andres Galarraga—1
Shane Reynolds—1
Kevin Appier—0
Pat Hentgen—0
Mike Jackson—0
Eric Karros—0
Ray Lankford—0
Dale Parker—0
David Segui—0
Todd Zeile—0