Note: several links in this article aren't correct, as I was having trouble accessing Baseball-Reference, but I wanted to get this article up to allow for discussion. I will fix them shortly.

Both good choices.. But none of those guys really stands out from the next.

Thomas, just today Rob Neyer wrote a column comparing Quisenberry favorably to Sutter, as I mentioned in another thread, and he says very much what you do: that if you're going to induct Sutter, preserve a spot for Quisenberry, who Neyer argues was at least as good, if not better.

Neyer mentions that one reason for the writers ignoring Quisenberry is that he was a "side-arming junkballer." I'm not sure of the validity of this. If anything, it would seem that a colourful pitcher like Quiz would get more favourable attention. General managers may ignore pitchers like Quisenberry, but it seems the mass media adores them.

I wouldn't consider this "unsurprising". After last year I didn't think Sandberg would get in. I'm really happy he did, though.

I'm not sure what's with the anti-80's bias, but the HoF seems really slow to consider players from that period. To me Trammell is a no-brainer. I know I'm known for my love of the 80's, but this just seems absurd.

I think Gossage will make it one year, probably during a weak class. He値l likely be accompanied, or will follow, Sutter, who was a great player for a number of years

That weak class comes next year.

Sutter: 661 GP, 1042.1 IPT, 68-71, 300 SV, 861 Ks, 309 BB, 2.83 ERA

Henke:_ 642 GP, 789.2 IPT, 41-42, 311 SV, 861 Ks, 255 BB, 2.67 RA

I love the identical strikeouts. Of course Sutter needed an extra 263 IPT to get them.

Well, maybe it's the post-season...

Sutter: 6 GP, 12 IPT, 2-0, 3 SV, 7 Ks, 3 BB, 3.00
Henke: 15 GP, 19.2 IPT, 2-0, 5 SV, 15 Ks, 9 BB, 1.83 ERA

Maybe not.

Guess I'm missing something.

Trammell better get in

If you really wanted to be a jerk, you'd start an anti-Sutter campaign. I think I'll do it, under the pseudonym Dick Lederer...

To me Trammell is a no-brainer. I know I'm known for my love of the 80's, but this just seems absurd.

You're not the only one. Trammell and Blyleven? Dawson and Rice? Geez, I think Keith Hernandez should be in. And Lou Whitaker. And Don Mattingly.

I will draw the line at Willie McGee.

For fun, now that it looks like Trammell and Whitaker both have gotten the thumbs down from the writers, here are the 1984 Tigers.

I had forgotten how good Willie Hernandez' season was. It's not the 32 straight saves that is notable; it's the 140 superb innings he threw. I am quite sure that he was more valuable that year than Morris or Petry.

Is Henke even on the ballot any more?

Trammell and Gossage not getting in?
One word: travesty.

And Blyleven?
Two words: freaking travesty.

As I have said before, though, I would have a Very Big Ballot, including names like John, Smith, Sutter, Kaat, Whitaker, Concepcion ...

Yeah, I love the '80's (and '70's) too.

You're not the only one. Trammell and Blyleven? Dawson and Rice? Geez, I think Keith Hernandez should be in. And Lou Whitaker. And Don Mattingly.

That's how I feel as well.

Particularly on Mattingly. I'll admit that I was a huge Mattingly fan growing up, so I'm not at all objective. I know he had the huge flameout at the end of his career, but he wouldn't be the first Hall of Famer that happened to. And this guy *was* baseball in the mid-late 80's.

it's the 140 superb innings he threw.

Not just that, but because he wasn't "the closer" when he arrived, he was actually being used much more often in high-leverage situations (where did that phrase come from?) than your typical closers.

That was a tough year for the Phillies. Your 1984 MVPs: Willie Hernandez (traded along with Dave Bergman for Wilson and Wockenfuss) and Ryne Sandberg (thrown in on the Bowa-DeJesus deal).

I don't remember Willie Hernandez' LI in 84 (I'll guess 1.6), but I seem to remember Mark Eichorn's being around 1.3. Eichorn's impact that year was probably the least appreciated relief season of my lifetime.

I might be exaggerating, but I can't think of any other more impactful relief season that is less discussed.

Didn't Mel Rojas have one of those mind-numbing 1.37 ERA/ridiculous peripherals-type years as a set-up guy in the mid-1990s? Like Eichhorn's year, you don't hear much about Rojas's, either.

Many, many, many years ago (in one of the 1980s Abstracts), Bill James got to wondering if there was some kind of big-market bias in award voting - MVP, Cy Young, etc. (I think a Dodger had won Rookie of the Year every year for like... a decade)

So he had a look, and found the exact opposite. Teams like the Pirates and Twins and, yes, the Royals, had done very well (compared to how the teams had done on the field), whereas the Yankees in particular had done very poorly.

Its like a New York backlash. It may have hurt Mattingly and Hernandez, it may hurt Bernie Williams down the road.

Mattingly only had about a six-year run as an outstanding player. So did Dizzy Dean. And Sandy Koufax.

Besides, it's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Objectively Outstanding and Productive. He was regarded, by his peers when he was active, as the best player in the game. (I don't think he was, but that's certainly what the other ball players thought, and I think you have to at least respect that.)

And his nickname was "Donnie Baseball." You can't have a Hall of Fame without that...

Moffatt, it's not suprising if you've been following the ballots that have been made public by sportswriters. If you haven't, I can see why Sandberg would be a suprise.

My Dad mentioned that Bob Elliott was on the radio discussing his ballot and he said he voted for six players. My Dad said he mentioned them, and after I gave him the big candidates he said that he thought Elliott had voted for Boggs, Sandberg, Rice, Murphy, Gossage and Sutter. Apparently, he also said some guy (I can only assume Rich Lederer) had been e-mailing him constantly arguing Blyleven's case and he is "almost convinced" that he's a good candidate.

Also, all the links are fixed, if anyone cares.

Moffatt, it's not suprising if you've been following the ballots that have been made public by sportswriters. If you haven't, I can see why Sandberg would be a suprise.

I haven't been. At all. So that must explain it. :)

Actually, Mattingly's run was 4 years. It's true that he was considered by some as the best player in the game during that time, but he obviously wasn't. Rickey Henderson was better, by a fair piece.

Here are his BR comparables. As you can see, Johnny O was a better ballplayer, as was Will Clark. Incidentally, Johnny O had 2 seasons that were better than any of Mattingly's. Personally, I would rather that none of these guys were in.

It's funny about the "Hall of Fame" thing. If you're going to choose the most famous, as opposed to the best, ballplayers, why would you ask sportswriters to do it? Surely, fans would be better judges of fame than sportswriters.

Because there are no standards for the HoF - there are no criteria, really, absolutely nothing at all - does anyone else find that whether or not someone should go in or not depends to a large degree on how you happen to be feeling about a player on a particular day?

After all, it's always easy to find at least 30 guys already enshrined who were clearly not as good as your chosen candidate.

I'm feeling warm and fuzzy about Mattingly today!

I could turn on him tomorrow...

After all, it's always easy to find at least 30 guys already enshrined who were clearly not as good as your chosen candidate.

This is so true.

My big beef is that it seems there are about a bazillion guys in the Hall from the 20s and 30s, and the 80s will be lucky to get a dozen players.

I guess we'll just have to wait for the Veteran's Committee to start enshrining players from that period.

The caption under the picture of Jack Morris on the front of the Jays homepage: "Former Jay Jack Morris helped Toronto win titles in 1991 and '92."

Former Jay Jack Morris helped Toronto win titles in 1991 and '92

Tee-hee.

Yeah, we're all wondering how that happened. After all, the 1991 Jays (without Jack Morris) finished 7 games ahead of Boston and Detroit.

Of course, Morris did go 2-1 against Boston.

Oops. Morris went 2-0 against Toronto, and beat them again in the LCS (the Twins won both his starts.)

So yeah. Thanks for the help, Jack.

Hall of Objectively Outstanding and Productive

Magpie, that'd be an awesome name given the acronym ... you really do have to jump through HOOPs to get into Cooperstown.

Token Yankee fan comment:
Don Mattingly, Hall of Famer? No.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/050104
Token Yankee fan comment:
Don Mattingly, Hall of Famer? No

So you're not one of the Yankee fans with whom Bill Simmons has been discussing Mattingly's credentials: COMN

You haven't really lived until you argued about the Hit Man's Hall of Fame credentials at a bar with a bunch of Yankees fans. It's like arguing about the existence of dinosaurs with Carl Everett...

Yeah, I read that. And even before I did, I wasn't into Mattingly as a HOFer. But you know, I'd never really thought of Mattingly in terms of Simmons' brilliant Ewing Theory ... and you know, he's right.

The one distinction Mattingly holds is "Greatest Yankee to never win a post-season series of any sort." I *know* it's not "his fault" they never won when he was on the team and in his first year as hitting coach they had the Hell Freezes Over Tour in Boston, but it makes you think.

Wasn't Mattingly involved with the Yanks in a smaller capacity before becoming hitting coach? For some reason, I can recall reading about how he became a coach/instructor in 2001, which coincides with the Yankee drought.

To me, Mattingly's kind of like Orel Hershiser. (Or Doc Gooden without the off-field problems). Hershiser had a great 5-6 year run himself, and certainly was one of THE most "famous" players of that era. He even had a HotShots! reference!

I'll be interested to see how Orel does next year. I think he's a better pick than Belle and Clark, which would make him the best new candidate on the ballot. Like Mattingly, though, the second part of his career was pretty mediocre, and his counting stats aren't particularly impressive.

I wonder, though... those '85-'89 ERAs look absolutely miniscule today. I can see a case being made for him. Does staying in the game as a Coach/Manager tend to help a player's HOF chances at all?

There has never been a unanimous HoF selection (to the best of my knowledge, Tom Seaver came closest.)

Makes you wonder. I can imagine a sportswriter not voting for Ted Williams, the man who once said that if you pour boiling water on a sportwriter you have instant sh*t.

But how could someone not vote for Stan Musial? How high a standard is that?

Can anyone explain this to me?

Ryne Sandberg, Hall of Famer
2164 G, 8385 AB, .285/.344/.452, 1318 R, 2386 H, 403 2B, 76 3B, 282 HR, 1061 RBI, 761 BB, 1060 K, 344 SB, 107 CS, 114 OPS+, 9 Gold Gloves

Lou Whitaker, off the ballot
2390 G, 8570 AB, .276/.363/.426, 1386 R, 2369 H, 420 2B, 65 3B, 244 HR, 1084 RBI, 1197 BB, 1099 K, 143 SB, 75 CS, 117 OPS+, 3 Gold Gloves

And I'll tell you what: if Frank White had played in the National League, it'd be Whitaker with 9 Gold Gloves and Ryno with 3. It's ridiculous.

Speaking of Frank White...

Bill Mazeroski, Hall of Famer
2163 G, 7755 AB, .260/ .299/ .367, 294 2B, 62 3B, 138 HR, 853 RBI, 447 BB, 706 K, 27 SB, 23 CS, 84 OPS+, 8 Gold Gloves

Frank White, off the ballot
2324 G, 7859 AB, .255/ .293/ .383, 407 2B, 58 3B, 160 HR, 886 RBI, 412 BB, 1035 K, 178 SB, 83 CS, 85 OPS+, 8 Gold Gloves

"The line must be drawn here!"

Somewhere, anyway.

Not that I think Frank White was a Hall of Famer. Whatever that is...

Oh right, the post-season. Frank White 1980 LCS MVP. And cleanup hitter on the 1985 WS champs. (Cleanup hitter? Yup.)

"The line must be drawn here!"

See you around, Ahab.

2006 has few big names coming on the ballot, so there's a pretty good chance that Gossage and Sutter will get in. Even Jim Rice has a shot. I fear for Alan Trammell, though.

Just looking at the 2007 eligibles, a group that includes Cal Ripken (guaranteed), Tony Gwynn (guaranteed) and .... Mark McGwire. Anyone think that the post-steroids atmosphere of '07 will keep Big Mac out of the Hall? I'd be willing to bet on it.

And is it just a coincidence that Maz played all 17 years in Pittsburgh and that White played all 18 years in Kansas City?

Is it just a coincidence that Maz played his last ML game in October 1972 and White made his ML debut the following June?

It's obvious.

They're the same guy.

Anyone think that the post-steroids atmosphere of '07 will keep Big Mac out of the Hall?

Wow, that would have to be some backlash. I mean, 583 HRs and all... despite retiring fairly young (37), despite basically losing 93-94 to foot injuries.

Still, it's hard to know what the atmosphere will be like in eighteen months.

I actually can foresee a degree of retroactive "tainting" by that point.

If we assume that baseball soon implements a steroid testing plan (which seems likely enough, with the union prepared to cooperate), a certain number of players currently on the juice (I don't know how many, but there are certainly some) will either get caught, abandon the steroids, or be retired by then. Combine that with what I sense is a continuing swing of the pendulum away from offence and towards pitching, and I expect scoring will drop steadily over the next few years.

By that time, the monster numbers of the late '90s may be widely considered suspect by the public, and McGwire is the poster boy for that era (with Sammy Sosa, currently considered a viable HOF candidate, next in line). If the present-day "morals backlash" continues apace throughout the remainder of the Bush years, I think McGwire and Sosa will have long odds against admission, at least for the first several years of their admissibility.

Can anyone explain this to me?

Sure. The difference is exactly 280 miles (451 km). Detroit and Chicago.

I guess that doesn't explain the Ron Santo thing though, huh?

Jeff Blair was on the Score (specifically, on Greg Sansone's show with a name so dumb I refuse to repeat it) and suggested that writers do consider personality and interaction with the media when voting. He said that he refused to vote for Gary Carter solely because he didn't treat him professionally on a few occasions. That strikes me as extrememly petulant, but if it's as common as he suggested it could go some way towards explaining some of the more curious omissions and inductions.

Hey Fawaz, what's your POINT?

Can anyone explain this to me?

Yeah, Jordan, I can.

The problem was that Lou Whitaker played in the AL in the company of plenty of good-to-great hitters. Ryne Sandberg, in contrast, was an absolutely premiere offensive player relative to his lighter-hitting NL peers (though he was helped by one of the few hitter-friendly NL ballparks of the '80s). And that was pretty rare for a second baseman.

In other words, Sandberg clobbers Sweet Lou in Black Ink and Grey Ink. Consider:

Lou Whitaker

Top 5 finishes in AL (4): Avg (1), Runs (1), Hits (1), Doubles (1).

Top 10 finishes in AL (18): Avg (1), OBP (3), Runs (2), Hits (1), Doubles (2), Triples (3), Home Runs (1), Walks (2), Adj OPS+ (3).

Ryne Sandberg

Top 5 finishes in NL (29): Avg (1), SLG (3), OPS (2), Runs (8), Hits (5), Doubles (1), Triples (1), Home Runs (2), Stolen Bases (1), Power/Speed No. (5).

Top 10 finishes in NL (58): Avg (4), OBP (1), SLG (5), OPS (6), Runs (8), Hits (8), Doubles (2), Triples (4), Home Runs (5), RBI (2), Walks (1), Stolen Bases (1), Power/Speed No. (8), Adj OPS+ (3).

I'm not saying it's fair -- or am I? -- but it's definitely explicable. When you add his relative offensive prowess to his defence, Sandberg was far and away the best player in his league at his position...and that makes the Hall automatic, full stop.

I also consider him to have been a better gloveman than the fine Whitaker, who benefited from a groundballing staff. Then again, I'm using the ol' "my own eyes" method, which is admittedly unreliable.

As for Mazeroski vs. White...it's been argued by wiser and more experienced minds than mine that Maz was the most valuable defensive second baseman of all time. Not to compare him to Ozzie, who's justifiably incomparable, but best-ever D at one's position can sneak a player into the Hall every now and then -- and rightfully so, in my opinion.

Joe Torre should be in the Hall for his Career numbers as a player.

.297/.365/.452

9 time all star, 1 GG at Catcher, 1 MVP.

Okay, I've never seen him play. But based on both reputation and numbers, Mazeroski may well have been the best defensive player ever. Even moreso than Ozzie.

Maybe. It could go either way, but I'd give them even odds.

I'm a real stickler when it comes to HOF balloting: I hate to think that in 50 years the place will be filled with unmemorable ho-hums who got in because their position sucked, there weren't many great players in their era or because there better than so and so who was better than so amd so who is in the HOF.

Baring multiple MVP or Cy Young caliber season, some postseason exploits or something else special for which they are imporatant, I believe 3000 hits or 300 wins are good meter sticks.

Wade Boggs had 3000 hits; had he no other merits I would still want him in the hall.

Ryan sandberg never had 3000 hits. He never played in the postseason. Had a life time OBP of only .344. His multiple all-star selection and other 2B comparisons merely represent a weakness at that position during his era. When I think of the HOF, I like to think of taking my kid there some day so he can see the names Mantle, Ruth, Mays, Koufax, the greats who are known not just in baseball but in by people who don't follow about baseball too. It is easy enough to see Sandberg as a good baseball player, but is he great..will we remember him as great: hardly

Mike D, Wrigley Field in the 80s and early 90s was an extreme hitter's context. Ryne Sandberg in his best years benefitted from this, and regularly hit much better at home (usually 20-40 points of batting average, and significantly more power). Whitaker also benefitted from a favorable environment, but not to the same degree. Sandberg was a significantly better fielder than Whitaker.

Sandberg was the best second baseman in the NL in the 80s; Whitaker was equally the best second baseman in the AL in the 80s. The major difference between the two as far as I am concerned is that Whitaker was a consistently excellent player for many years, whereas Sandberg did reach a somewhat higher peak and established similar overall value in a somewhat shorter span.

As far as I am concerned, Sandberg was a titch better, but they should both be in.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/020108a
I hate to think that in 50 years the place will be filled with unmemorable ho-hums

Well, that horse has kinda left the barn already. George Kelly? Jesse Haines? Travis Jackson? Fred Lindstrom?

Bill Simmons' Pyramid Scheme (COMN) (which is very similar to an old Bill James idea) looks better and better. Rabbit Maranville gets a plaque and Honus Wagner gets a statue.

Ryne Sandberg actually did play in the postseason (the LCS in 1985 and 1989) and very well too. Being a Cub, of course he never played in a WS, but it was hardly his fault.

He was a Cub. :-)

If you could easily make the case that Ryne Sandberg is one of the ten best second basemen of all time (Bill James had him seventh in the new Historical Abstract), it would have to be a pretty exclusive Hall not to include the ten best at each position. As Mike Green and others have said, Sandberg was the best NL second baseman in the 80s. How many HOFers can say they were the best at their position for a decade?

I can understand the desire for some people to want a 'smaller' Hall of Fame. However, the point has been made by smarter people than me that if an actual DEFINITION of a Hall of Fame player had been created back in the day, we might not have guys like Travis Jackson in there lowering the bar for the rest. Hell, five percent of the writers threw Willie McGee a vote. What the deuce is their definition of a Hall of Famer if they think Willie should be a member? Why not some love for Lloyd Moseby while you're at it?

I think McGwire and Sosa will have long odds against admission, at least for the first several years of their admissibility.

Care to bet a pair of good seats for a Jays game on this Jordan? I think that the voters will draw a distinction between andro and steroids, whether justified or not.

He never played in the postseason.

I just pray to God that this clown doesn't have a vote. He only played 10 postseason games, but had an OPS of greater than 1100, not that I think that matters.

Wade Boggs and Ryne Sandberg are worthy candidates to enter the Hall of Fame.

Here is an interesting stat: Winning Pitcher by decade

1950's- Robin Roberts and Warren Spahn HOF
1960's- Juan Marichal HOF
1970's- Jim Palmer HOF
1980's- Jack Morris not in the Hall of Fame
1990's- Greg Maddux future HOF

Jack Morris deserves to be in the HOF!

Right. I see the logic in electing Jack Morris because he happened to lead the league in a counting stat for an arbitrary period of time.



Exceptional achievement in a counting stat can be a persuasive argument, so long as other pieces of evidence equally point towards induction into the Hall, but with Morris, much of the other evidence (IMHO) simply does not support his HoF candidacy.

Apologies for the lack of a sarcastic smiley after my first sentence just above. Grr.

Shrike- here is some evidence that supports Jack Morris being in the Hall of Fame.

4 World Series Rings: 84 Tigers, 91 Twins and 92 and 93 Blue Jays;
Pitched a No Hitter for Tigers in 1984
3 -20 Win Seasons
12 seasons winning 15 games or more
5 Time All Star

Morris contemporaries are Bob Feller and Jim Bunning and both in the Hall of Fame

The one knock against Morris is the 3.96 career ERA that is a high number.

Anyone think that the post-steroids atmosphere of '07 will keep Big Mac out of the Hall? I'd be willing to bet on it.

McGwire: a sure first-ballot HOFer, steroid use be damned. For my winnings, Jordan, assuming I'm not already a Canadian citizen or a Parisian chimney sweep, you can pay my debts to my immigration lawyer. Better yet, you can be my immigration lawyer.

Pointing to wins (again) as a major factor in favour of Morris' candidacy is redundant, and not persuasive. You might also admit that Morris' 3.96 career ERA would be the highest ever for a HoF pitcher. It's evidence that strongly suggests he wasn't good enough to merit induction, as do a host of other metrics.

Winning World Series rings in Toronto--not persuasive, Morris was not a good pitcher by this point in his career.

Pitching a no-hitter--to invoke John McEnroe, "You cannot be serious!"

McGwire and steroids. Funny how he has mainly avoided being tained like Barry Bonds has, even though McGwire actually was caught with his hand in the cookie jar. One look at McGwire in his big seasons and steroids screams at you. He had andro in his locker and lord knows what else he used away from the locker room. But he has poster boy looks and 'saved baseball'. Sigh. His career was interesting, rookie of the year then his average went down and he started to look like a young Dave Kingman (25-27 seasons average was 231-235-201) then he started to improve again before being injured for two seasons (ages 29 & 30) then became the McGwire everyone remembers, two great injury filled years in Oakland followed by a 58 HR campaign between Oakland & St Louis followed by the 70 season, 65 HR, then injuries until retirement. To me it sounds very much like what is supposed to happen to a steroid user.

Would I keep him out? No. There were no baseball rules against steroids at the time, thus it wouldn't be fair to hold it against him. Still, if you feel steroids should keep someone out then McGwire is your poster boy, more so than Bonds.

If anyone is interested, Rob Neyer will be chatting about the Hall on ESPN.com at 1:00 (eastern time). In his column today, he mentioned that, with Sandberg getting elected, it looks good for Craig Biggio, Roberto Alomar, and maybe even Jeff Kent.

http://www.baseballreference.com/friv/scomp.cgi?I=whitalo01:Lou+Whitaker&st=career
I don't know about that. The writers elected Sandberg, but Whitaker was tossed off the ballot right away. COMN for Lou's BR comparables. Sandberg, Alomar and Biggio are all quite similar. Sandberg and Alomar were more famous in their respective primes, and both had better defensive reputations (Sandberg was in fact better defensively).

My guess is that Alomar will get voted in by the writers, because of all those Gold Gloves combined with his offence, but Biggio's chances are about the same as before the Whitaker/Sandberg decisions.

If Biggio doesn't make the HoF, he will likely establish a new line of how many hits you can get in a career without getting into the Hall.

Right now, everybody who a) is eligible for the Hall, and b) has more than 2900 hits is in.

Harold Baines is out, with his 2866.

In the 2700 group, though, we find Andre Dawson, Al Oliver, Vada Pinson, Rusty Staub, Bill Buckner, and Dave Parker. They're not all going to make it. Barry Bonds (a lock) and Roberto Alomar (a probable) are currently parked there as well.

Biggio right now is at 2639 and he had 178 hits last year. He surely has an excellent chance to overtake Baines at least.

You might understand writers better than I, Magpie. Fred McGriff has 493 homers. No retired player who has more is not in the HoF, and the only one even remotely close who will not get in is Jose Canseco with 462. Yet, there seems to be a lot of debate about Freddie.

Does 2900 hits carry with it more cachet than 490 homers? Maybe singles hitters drive Maseratis these days, with power hitters driving lowly Cadillacs.

Hey, I'm a Tigers' fan and I don't think Morris should get in. If there were an almost HOF, he should be there, but he was just a very good pitcher who pitched on great teams for a long time. Trammell is a no-brainer for me. Just look at his numbers. He deserved the MVP in 1987, won the WS MVP in 1984 and was a very good hitter for a long time. Sweet Lou is a bit behind Tram IMO because 2B was a better hitter's position for the longest time and also he padded his stats a lot the last few years of his career as a part-timer against righties. Still, I'd put him very close. It bothers me to no end that he could be off tha ballot, but Willie Magee could get enough to stay on. Sure, the man was gorgeous, and I'm talking Otis Nixon gorgeous, but his numbers just stunk.

For the record, I don't mean to be overly critical of Morris. I completely agree with Gabriel's sentiments, and I would vote every year, if I had a vote to cast, to elect both Whitaker & Trammell to the Hall.

Sweet Lou is a bit behind Tram IMO because 2B was a better hitter's position for the longest time and also he padded his stats a lot the last few years of his career as a part-timer against righties.

I have two problems with this. One is theoretical. I don't really see what the respective batting strength of other American League second basemen has to do with comparing Trammell and Whitaker to each other. As hitters, especially hitters on the same team, just compare them to each other. (I'm also not sure - was second base really a stronger hitter's position? Other AL shortstops of the time included Yount, Ripken, Franco, Fernandez...)

I also don't think Whitaker was padding his stats as a platoon player - he was helping his team, as a hitter, right to the end. His games were cut back in his last three seasons, but he was still a terrific hitter when he was in the lineup. You could DH him against righties if you wanted...

...with Sandberg getting elected, it looks good for Craig Biggio, Roberto Alomar, and maybe even Jeff Kent.

Alomar's the strongest candiadate of the four of them, with the highest peak (according to WARP) and the most productive career (again by WARP). Plus he's two decent seasons away from 3000 hits (granted, at this stage of his career it's still a longshot).

Is this the first man to go to Cooperstown with a Blue Jay on his cap (which was the style at the time)?

Welcome back, Jurgen. You've been missed.