better? no. Tougher? abso-fucking-lutely. Though that argument could probably be made for any sport not taking place in a ring or octogon or whatever.

Dude, if you can get me an autographed picture of Bert in the "I <3 To Fart" T-shirt, I'll make it worth your while.

Strange that Alomar does, though. He was on 2 of the Roid HoF teams - Baltimore and Cleveland in the mid to late 90s. They were practically giving dianabol shots on Fan Appreciation Day....and then he mysteriously got the injury bug and retired.

Alomar was well on his way to the Hall by the time he had won back to back rings with Toronto.

Respect for Alomar. Was really pulling for Bags, but just wasn't his time.

Yeah, and then all of his stats miraculously jumped 30% in the mid nineties.

And, as a guy who always throws out Ken Griffey's hammy problems as evidence of a possible roid accusation against him, I thought you'd be leading this charge.

Also, I would never vote for Robbie after the spitting incident. Fuck him.

No chance for Bags unless the writers opinion on roids changes.

Normally you'd probably be right, but I've always had a stiffy for Robbie...what can I say, he's one of my guys.

Yeah, which is absolutely garbage. Never has been attached to a roids accusation, and was never abnormally huge. Not that those are the only criteria, but its a lot of what the others are hinged on barring a positive test result.

I thought he was pretty huge but was apparently a workout fiend. Agree nonetheless that it's bullshit excuse to vote against a guy based on unsubstantiated innuedos. I think he eventually makes it at least unless some credible evidence comes out that he was a big abuser. I think a lot of voters just haven't figured out how to deal with this era of candidate and aren't voting for anyone until they have figured out how to analyze the era. They're going to have to though as more and more candidates come up. Also, he played in a small market and is probably very underrated. He'll benefit from a Blyleven like campaign. Some voters also don't seem to like to vote for all but the most elite candidates on the first ballot thinking that getting on the first ballot is like an added special recognition. There aren't really any new deserving candidates on next year's ballot so I think he'll certainly get a lot more votes next time even if he doesn't make it on the next ballot.

I went back to check my memory, and googled images of him. He grew, but it wasn't an oddly-fast growth. He was still pretty big when he won ROY. Absolutely agree about the first ballot thing, but still it seems like a lot of writers are calling this out, in yet he obviously didn't get the votes.

Alomar. Another HOFer the Padres got rid of...

Is this one of the pics you found?:



I don't think the case that people are making is that he all of a sudden was huge. It's that he was much smaller later in his career which could be explainable by reduced workouts because of injuries but looks suspicious to many because it maybe coincides with increased testing as well. Agreed though that it's bs though to just decide a guy is huge thus he was a cheater and shouldn't make the hall. He was a big guy though...that was what i was reacting to you in your post.

Bags was also an admitted Andro user.

Deadspin reader, eh? haha.

I saw Bagwell A LOT because his career nicely dovetailed the years when I watched a shit ton of baseball and the Astros and Braves always seemed to be playing even when they weren't in the same division.. Personally, I think he's very borderline. He was a very good hitter but I never feared him. I can't remember or point to one moment or series of moments where he rose up and was among the best players in the game. In my book, the Hall of Famer from those Astros teams is Craig Biggio, end of story.

this

and i was a hardcore astros fan for years

bags was very, very good - but not quite great

The other thing that causes people to think bags was a user is he didn't have much power in the minors. Not that a man's minor league career should have any bearing on his Hall consideration.

And I agree he is borderline. He's a power hitting first baseman in an era loaded with power hitting first baseman. I wonder what his WARs were.

Funny, I've always despised him.

I don't think Bagwell is being treated quite the same as Palmeiro and McGwire. Bagwell got 42% of the vote. Palmeiro got 11% and McGwire 20% (down from 24% last year). Add to that the anti-first year bias mentioned above, which I think is very real (Alomar jumped from 74% his first year to 90% this year) and Bagwell probably gets in after a few years.

I'm surprised Olerud and Brown didn't get enough votes to stick around. But what I really want to know is, what two writers voted for BJ Surhoff!?

I thought Brown would get more votes.

One of the Surhoff voters is an editor for ESPN. His entire ballot looks utterly ridiculous, almost an FU to the Hall.

The HOF is a joke....

There was a good link off a deadspin article about someone raving about the same thing. In the comments section another guy broke down why his minor league numbers weren't as good. Its like the first Bagwell on deadspin.

This was sort of my initial gut feel too until I started looking at the case people were making for him.

Every other player with 1500 runs scored and 1500 RBIs is in the hall
Every other player with some minimum number of ABs with a career OBA of .400 and a career slugging % of .500 is in.
And he only trails Gehrig, Foxx and Pujols in career WAR among 1B.

I think he's the sort of player that almost everyone would acknowledge is at least borderline but probably has a stronger case than most people realize. I think he's a good candidate for a Blyleven like stat geek campaign and agree with Shmoo that he'll get in within a few years.