Next Tuesday (Jan. 21), the results of the balloting for the 2025 Baseball Hall of Fame class will be revealed. CBS Sports has two first-time voters who took part in the process. Mike Axisa’s ballot can be viewed here while Matt Snyder’s can be viewed here. There are similarities to the ballots, of course, but there are some differences as well.
There’s really no need to discuss agreements on players like Ichiro Suzuki, CC Sabathia or Chase Utley. Instead, let’s discuss some of the hot topics, including where we strayed.
Matt Snyder: Let’s start with the easy and obvious. I didn’t vote for Alex Rodríguez or Manny Ramírez. You voted for both (thankfully, as it would be mind-boggling to only vote for one).
I’ve long said my line will be if a player was suspended under the joint drug agreement he’s a no for me, but otherwise I just judge how the player played on the field. That means I would have been a yes for Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Mark McGwire, etc., but I will be a no for A-Rod, Manny, Robinson Canó, Ryan Braun, etc.
My thought process here is when there were no punishments in place by Major League Baseball, not only was the league looking the other way with regard to any PED use, but it was actively enriching itself with things like the McGwire/Sammy Sosa home run chase in 1998. Bud Selig was commissioner at the time and he’s in the Hall of Fame, after all.
Once there was a testing and punishment system put in place, my stance is any player knowingly violating the rules was actively cheating the system and risking not only himself but also his teammates. A player the caliber of Manny or A-Rod getting nailed for 50 games or more (remember, A-Rod was 211) is an incredibly selfish act that puts seasons at risk. That isn’t Hall of Fame behavior for me.
I’ve heard people say there were likely plenty of others juicing and they just didn’t get caught and I know and realize this. I just don’t know who they are with any degree of certainty. I know A-Rod and Manny got busted and cost their teams.
Where do you disagree here and why?
Mike Axisa: First off, yes, we agree it’s hypocritical Selig is in the Hall of Fame after essentially looking the other way during the Steroid Era. Testing only began after the MLBPA pushed for it. MLB didn’t crack down on PEDs so much as the union asked the league to clean up the game.
As for A-Rod and Manny, my belief is that they were punished in accordance with the agreed-upon rules at the time, so they’ve done their time and it’s case closed. There was no testing or punishment when McGwire and the other Steroid Era guys played, which is on MLB, not the players. I’m not comfortable handing out extrajudicial punishment for players who’ve already served suspensions. For all I care, put “served two PED suspensions” on Manny’s Hall of Fame plaque and “served the longest PED suspension in history” on A-Rod’s. It’s part of their legacy, so acknowledge it. (This will never happen.)
I agree these were selfish acts that cost their teams games on the field during their absences, though I think it’s possible to flip it around and say they were unselfish acts because they put themselves at risk to try to help their team win. I don’t believe that and I won’t make that argument. I’m just showing this is all in the eye of the beholder. One person making a costly decision is another doing everything he can to help his team.
While I agree these were costly and selfish acts, Manny and A-Rod are so far above my personal Hall of Fame threshold that it isn’t enough to keep them out of Cooperstown. Maybe if it was a borderline player and I was having trouble deciding yes or no, this would be something that pushed me toward no, but Manny’s one of the greatest right-handed hitters ever and A-Rod is one of the best all-around players ever. In terms of on-field performance, it’s no question. They’re in. It’s just a matter of how you feel about their PED use (and PED use in general). I see them as having served their punishment, and that’s the end of it.
Baseball Hall of Fame: Peak players, PED guys on Mike Axisa’s ballot, plus a surprising Ichiro consideration
Mike Axisa
Matt Snyder: Let’s stay in a similar ballpark and discuss Carlos Beltrán and Andruw Jones. We both voted for Beltran and I voted for Jones while you withheld a vote for him.
Starting with Beltrán, there’s the whole sign-stealing fiasco relating to the 2017 Astros. My stance on this was it would never prevent me from voting for anyone, as it was a team-wide operation and while using electronics to steal signs was absolutely forbidden by Major League Baseball, there wasn’t really a set system of punishments in place for players violating the rule, such as with the PEDs. I’ve seen people who believe Beltrán did things worse or on level with the PED violators and I’m just not seeing it.
Did you weigh the sign-stealing thing on Beltrán and how did it compare to how you weighed PEDs, if at all?
Mike Axisa: I treated the sign-stealing the same way I treated PEDs. The league investigated and handed out punishment, and that’s that. In this case, Beltrán was not punished. MLB could have done more — and I think they should have done more — but they didn’t. Beltrán later “mutually agreed to part ways” with the Mets after being hired as their manager because the sign-stealing scandal had become a distraction, though that was not something handed down by the league. The Mets and Beltrán did that on their own.
It never really sat well with me that Beltrán was the only player named in MLB’s investigation. The league blamed it all on A.J. Hinch, Jeff Luhnow, and Beltrán. Beltrán had already retired as a player by then, and Hinch and Luhnow were given one-year suspensions. That’s it. No players were disciplined even though they were the ones doing it. The report detailing MLB’s investigation was so over the top in absolving Astros owner Jim Crane of any wrongdoing, which I guess makes sense seeing how Crane is Rob Manfred’s boss. It all just felt like the league said “how can we make this go away as quickly and painlessly as possible?”
PEDs and the sign-stealing scandal are both bad and wrong, but it’s different degrees of bad and wrong. I actually think the sign-stealing scandal is worse than PEDs, especially the way the Astros went about it. The entire team was in on it! It wasn’t one bad egg going off on his own taking PEDs, and it wasn’t a runner at second picking up the catcher’s signs. That’s gamesmanship and OK in my book. The Astros had a video system and an algorithm to help them decode signs. That’s pretty egregious. Is it enough for me to keep Beltrán out of the Hall of Fame? No, obviously not since I voted for him, but I think a cheating scandal this elaborate is worse than one player doing something against the rules.
As for Andruw Jones, I think he’s a Hall of Famer and would have voted for him, but I ran out of space. It came down to Bobby Abreu and Jones for my last spot, and I’m an offense-first guy, so I went with the superior hitter over the superior defender. Jones had one season (136 OPS+ in 2005) better than Abreu’s average season (128 OPS+), and Abreu had one more +5 WAR season than Jones. Jones had the superior peak (three +7 WAR seasons to Abreu’s zero), but Abreu was damn good too, and he beats Jones on longevity. Again, I would have voted for Jones if I had space. I only had room for one guy though, and went with Abreu.
Matt Snyder: It seems like we agree on Jones — I’ve discussed his domestic violence history elsewhere — it’s just that I had room on my ballot due to not voting for Manny and A-Rod while he sits in your 11th spot when there’s a 10-vote max. Was there another tough omission for you?
I think my toughest one was Félix Hernández. The starting pitching line has been one of the things I’ve thought the most about the last few years. I thought for a while I’d never vote for Mark Buehrle and/or Andy Pettitte, and yet they both appear on my first ballot. My rationale was that I think we probably need to lower the standard for starting pitchers just a little bit due to the manner in which workload decreases as time progresses. We used to have pitchers completing nearly every start, then there were just four-man rotations, then there were five-man rotations and now we get six-man rotations at times along with openers and bullpen games. It’s an ever-changing world and I don’t want one of the most important positions to be left behind.
As such, I went a bit below the previous standard to grab Buehrle and Pettitte. This leads me to believe I’ll need a spot for Cole Hamels next year and the more this voting season has gone on, the more I’ve started to think I made a mistake in not putting King Félix on my first ballot. He had an immense peak and then fell apart rather quickly. He still racked up over 2,500 strikeouts in more than 2,700 innings with great run prevention. In glancing at his most statistical similar pitchers through age 30, Don Sutton is first and Fergie Jenkins is second with Steve Carlton and Greg Maddux also appearing in his top 10. I do think if we were using the established Hall of Fame standard — that is, judging against players already in the Hall and trying to elect only players better than average from this group — Felix still falls short as his lack of longevity prevented his needed compiling. In relaxing the standard for starting pitchers, however, I think I might need to loop him in on future ballots.
Where do you stand on starting pitchers in general and, specifically, Hernández here?
Baseball Hall of Fame: Why Carlos Beltrán, Billy Wagner, Andy Pettitte get votes on Matt Snyder’s ballot
Matt Snyder
Mike Axisa: I wanted to vote for Félix but didn’t have room on my ballot. For me, it came down to Buehrle and Pettitte simply having longer careers. Hernández had the greatest peak of the three (he was arguably the best pitcher in the world from 2009-14), but Buehrle and Pettitte had an identical career ERA+ (all 117) in several hundred more innings, plus postseason success. I’m not dinging Félix for his lack of postseason work (I blame the Mariners for that). I’m elevating Buehrle and Pettitte for theirs. In a way, Hernández is the pitcher version of Andruw Jones on the field. Broke in at 19 and had an incredible peak, and was basically done as an effective regular by 31.
It’s funny, I also second-guessed myself for omitting Félix after I filled out my ballot and mailed it. I thought maybe I should have voted Hernández over Pettitte because Pettitte’s been on the ballot for seven years now and hasn’t come close to getting in, meaning my Pettitte vote was a waste. Or maybe I should have omitted a position player (Bobby Abreu was my “final” player) and done whatever it took to vote for Hernández to make sure he stays on the ballot so I can vote for him in the future. In the end, I decided to vote for who I considered the best players rather than strategically omit someone. Ryan Thibodaux’s public ballot tracker indicates Félix will be over the 5% threshold needed to stay on the ballot, so I feel relieved. I’m glad I’ll get to vote for him next year. I try not to fall into the “you had to watch him play” trap, but man, watching King Félix pitch screamed Hall of Famer.
As for starting pitchers in general, yeah, I think we need to lower the standard for Hall of Fame entry. The game has changed and we should change along with it. (I think this applies to relievers too, not just starters.) Pitchers are not asked to throw 250 innings anymore, so why would I as a Hall of Fame voter dock them for not doing it? I don’t agree with the general take that there will never be another 300-game winner (never is a long time!), but it is harder than ever to get there. At this point, 200 wins is impressive. We know better than to judge players on pitcher wins, but win 200 games, and it’s a pretty good indication you had a long career and were effective. I hadn’t looked ahead to next year’s ballot yet. Hamels will be an interesting case. My super early inclination is to vote for him.
Read the full article here
