The 2023 BBWAA Hall of Fame Election Results: Part 1 [Public Versus Anonymous Votes]
It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future. Yogi Berra [although it is claimed that many of his quotes were actually made up by sportswriters]
February 11th, 2023
A Correct but Faulty Prediction
On January 24th of 2023, the Hall of Fame elected Scott Rolen to the Baseball Hall of Fame. Two weeks previously, on January 11th, this Blog stated that the Baseball Hall of Fame Tracker (compiled by Ryan Thibodaux) had reduced this election to the simple question of: Will Scott Rolen be elected?* As predictions go, this seems to have been pretty solid. But real life is never quite that clean. When this prediction was made, it was also asserted that Rolen was probably the only candidate with any chance of being elected. At that time, the Hall of Fame Tracker had collected 154 ballots. Scott Rolen had been named on 125 of them. Todd Helton, in second place, had been named on 123. On second thought, any predictions based on that sample should have been taken with a boulder-sized grain of salt. Rolen and Helton were essentially tied. Between January 11th and January 24th, Rolen and Helton eventually swapped places. On January 23rd, Helton led Rolen 149 to 147 votes with 186 ballots counted [177 public & 9 unverified ballots]. When the actual results were released the very next day, Rolen had regained the lead on the HOF Tracker with 167 votes to 163 for Helton [207 ballots total]. But, in the actual results, Rolen received 297 votes and Helton collected just 281 [of 389 total]. Scott Rolen’s four vote lead on the Tracker had ballooned to 16 votes in the actual election. He was the only player elected. The prediction was only true because Rolen got more of the anonymous votes, which the HOF Tracker cannot count, than Helton. In other words, it was correct but faulty. Is there anything to be learned from the differences between the 207 public ballots that were counted before the election by the HOF Tracker and the 182 anonymous ballots? This post will take a look at these differences & then make an attempt to explaining them. In 2 future posts, some suggestions will be made to a) change the BBWAA HOF voting process and b) make some needed adjustments to the entire Baseball Hall of Fame election process itself.
*See Post #24
The Public versus the Anonymous Hall of Fame Voters
There were a few underlying assumptions behind the January 11th prediction. One was that the Baseball Hall of Fame [HOF] Tracker compiles the ballots of the more liberal wing of the Baseball Writers Association of America [BBWAA]. In 2023, the HOF Tracker collected 207 of the eventual 389 ballots cast before the election (194 attributed & 13 unverified).* Basically, the Tracker compiled the votes of slightly more than half of all the eligible BBWAA voters before the election. It was presumed that writers who release their ballots to the public are more liberal than the writers who kept their votes anonymous (even if it is just until the election is actually over). But is this really true? Allowing public scrutiny does not necessarily equate to being a more liberal person. Another assumption made by the prior post was that the published voters were more interested in modern statistical analysis (Wins Above Replacement, aka WAR, etc); while the anonymous voters would be more interested in traditional but discredited stats such as games won for pitchers and runs batted in [RBIs] for batters. But is this also true? Yet another assumption made by the prior post was that anonymous voters believe in the Small Hall of Fame argument. This argument states that the Baseball Hall of Fame honor should be reserved only for the very greatest players: Babe Ruth, Willie Mays, Walter Johnson, Satchel Paige, etc. Scott Rolen type players need not apply. Behind this assumption is an actual fact. In previous elections, BBWAA HOF election candidates have had their vote percentages diminish appreciably as the anonymous votes are counted. But is this Small HOF argument true? Maybe the anonymous voters are just lazy and cast less votes. Finally, there was also the assumption being made that the published voters were less judgmental than their anonymous colleagues (i.e. the public voters would be more likely to vote for a candidate with moral lapses on their resumes than the anonymous voters). This would also fit their characterization as “Liberals.” But are any of these assumptions actually true?
*For the 2023 election, the Baseball Hall of Fame mailed out 405 total ballots. They received back 389 before the January 24th, 2023, deadline.
The Actual Evidence
Interestingly, the results of the 2023 election, split into the 207 public ballots and the 182 anonymous ballots (as of January 24th, 2023), can be analyzed for evidence to support or dispute these assumptions. In the recent election, there were 28 players on the ballot. But 12 of these players, all on the ballot for the 1st time, received either one or no votes. This was their one and only chance to be elected by the BBWAA. For the sake of this discussion, they are no longer relevant. However, the vote totals, published and unpublished, of the other 16 men can be reviewed. Did these 16 players receive the majority of their support from public voters (liberals who believe in modern statistics, an inclusive HOF, and will forgive moral lapses) or from the anonymous voters (conservatives who believe in traditional statistics, a limited HOF, and will not forgive scandal)? One thing is undisputed. In 2023, the anonymous voters, as usual in the previous elections counted by the Baseball HOF Tracker, voted far less than the public voters. To be precise, the 16 candidates under discussion here lost an average of 12.56% from their HOF Tracker vote percentage once all the anonymous ballots were counted.* In other words, it could be argued that if a player fades by less than 12.56%, they may have more support from the anonymous voters than the public ones. Or perhaps not. In any event, the breakdowns between the public and the anonymous votes for all 16 of the players (who lived to possibly be elected by the BBWAA another day) are listed below in order of their vote totals. Also, there is a brief discussion of each player’s Hall of Fame results, trends, and eventual chance to be elected (except for Scott Rolen, who is now in forever).
*16 total players; 1285 public votes on 2070 ballot spaces [10×207); and 988 anonymous votes on 1820 ballot spaces (10×182).
The 2023 Ballot Survivors
1) Scott Rolen: got 297 of the 389 total votes cast [76.3%] in the Baseball Hall of Fame 2023 election; receiving 167 of the 207 total public votes counted by the Tracker before the election [80.7%]; and then getting 130 of 182 Residual votes uncounted by the Tracker [71.4%]. The threshold for election to the Hall was 292 votes [75%]. Scott Rolen was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame by four votes. This was his 6th year on the BBWAA ballot (which will very happily be his last). His candidacy was supported more by modern statistical analysis (70.1 WAR with outstanding fielding metrics) than by traditional statistics. But Rolen’s traditional stats were not completely lacking either. By every account, Scott Rolen is a good and upstanding citizen so there were no moral lapses to impede his candidacy. His vote percentage did recede when the anonymous ballots came in, but not too badly (just 9.3% rather than the 2023 average of 12.6%). The evidence seems to support the argument that Rolen lost some of the anonymous voters simply because they did not find him qualified [i.e the “Small Hall” voters]. But that should have been their only problem with him. That said, it should be noted that, if the public voters had voted at the same percentages that the anonymous ones did, Scott Rolen would still be waiting outside the Baseball Hall of Fame cathedral in 2023 [Path 2018-2023: 1-10.2%; 2-17.2%; 3-35.3%; 4-52.9%; 5-63.2%; 6-76.3% Elected].
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Baseball_Hall_of_Fame_balloting
[Path 201x-2023: 1-%; 2-%; 3-%; 4-%; 5-%; 6-%; 7-%; 8-%; 9-%; 10-%].
2) Todd Helton: 281/389 [72.2%]; Tracker 163/207 [78.7%]; Residual 118/182 [64.8%]; 5th year. On the surface, Todd Helton has better traditional statistics than Scott Rolen [G-HR-RBI-BA-SA]. However, Helton lost 13.9% of his votes when the anonymous ballots were counted. Rolen lost just 9.3%. But Helton has warts on his resume that Rolen does not [an unconfirmed steroid rumor and several post career DUIs]. This would seem to confirm the theory that the anonymous voters are more judgmental. Of course, these anonymous voters could also have been devaluing Helton’s career statistics because he played in the offensive pinball park named Coors Field. But that would have been quite modern of them. In any event, Helton is still ahead of Rolen on a year to year basis [in his 5th year, Helton reached 72.2% against Rolen’s 63.2%]. It will be a complete shock if Todd Helton is not elected next year after just missing by a mere eleven votes in 2023 [Path 2019-2023: 1-16.5%; 2-29.2%; 3-44.9%; 4-52.0%; 5-72.2%].
3) Billy Wagner: 265/389 [68.1%]; Tracker 150/207 [72.5%]; Residual 115/182 [63.2%]; 8th year. The HOF support for Billy Wagner actually goes against the conventional wisdom. Modern statistical analysis does not support Wagner’s eventual election at all.* It seems like most of his support should come from the traditional-statistics-loving anonymous voters (“look at all the saves”). But the public voters put Wagner on 9.3% more ballots than the anonymous ones. Wagner had a better than normal fade. This can perhaps be explained away by the “Reliever Conundrum.” For some reason, all BBWAA voters have been bound and determined to elect the best ace relievers to the Baseball Hall of Fame [but no one pushes to elect Manny Mota, arguably the best pinch hitter of all-time]. Wagner has only two years left for the BBWAA to elect him; but he surely has a better than 50-50 chance that he gets honored in either 2024 or 2025 (especially after he jumped 17% this year to 68%). If he does fall off the BBWAA ballot, Wagner will still almost surely eventually be elected. The HOF clean-up Committees do not let players who get over 50% of the BBWAA vote linger in oblivion. It will just take a bit longer. It would be interesting to know how badly Wagner’s brutal post-season record has hurt his candidacy. Billy Wagner was lights out during the regular season but consistently burned his team to the ground whenever the playoffs rolled around. It actually doesn’t seem to have hurt his candidacy at all [Path 2016-2023: 1-10.5%; 2-10.2%; 3-11.1%; 4-16.7%; 5-31.7%; 6-46.7%; 7-51.0%; 8-68.1%].
*Serious Hall of Fame support for non-Ace Relievers players starts at about 50 career Wins Above Replacement [WAR]. Billy Wagner, like most relievers, is no where in that vicinity. He had just 27.7 career WAR.
4) Andruw Jones: 226/389 [58.1%]; Tracker 138/207 [66.7%]; Residual 88/182 [48.4%]; 6th year. The fall off [18.3%] from public voters to anonymous voters for Andruw Jones is right in line with the argument that public voters support modern statistics over traditional (he has great fielding metrics but his career batting average was just .254) and are less judgmental (a strip club scandal in his 20s and getting so out of shape in his 30s that his career effectively ended at the age of 30). There is probably a better than 50-50 chance that Jones is elected by the BBWAA before his eligibility runs out. He has four more years to get that last 17% he needs. But, if he doesn’t make it through the BBWAA, Jones will probably eventually get in through some HOF clean-up Committee just like Billy Wagner. However, Jones wait might be considerably longer. All HOF Committees seem to be conservative and judgmental. That 18.3 percent fade seems to indicate that there will be a rougher road for him if his election gets left up to some future HOF Committee [Path 2018-2023: 1-7.3%; 2-7.5%; 3-19.4%; 4-33.9%; 5-41.4%; 6-58.1%].
5) Gary Sheffield: 214/389 [55.0%]; Tracker 130/207 [62.8%]; Residual 84/182 [46.2%]; 9th year. In this Blog’s previous post, it was asserted that Sheffield would probably eventually get into the Hall of Fame. That may have been a bit pre-mature. Sheffield had a steep 16.6 percent drop-off from the public voters to the anonymous ones. Unlike Helton, Sheffield’s involvement in the steroid scandals was more than just a rumor. Sheffield’s claim that he did not know that he was applying a steroid cream to his knees is somewhat sketchy. On the other hand, in this country, you are presumably innocent until proven guilty (though modern social media has stood this formula on its head), and there has been no other damning evidence. With only one year of eligibility remaining, Gary Sheffield has a slim chance of being elected by the BBWAA.* And when you say slim, it is totally anorexic. Sheffield needs 20% more votes for his last year. In his first nine years, his best yearly percentage increase was just 16.9%. It looks pretty grim actually. After that he will be in front of some future HOF clean-up Committee that may just dismiss him outright like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens were this year. There is a very good chance that he slips into Baseball Hall of Fame purgatory after the 2024 BBWAA HOF election ends [Path 2015-2023: 1-11.7%; 2-11.6%; 3-13.3%; 4-11.1%; 5-13.6%; 6-30.5%; 7-40.6%; 8-40.6%; 9-55.0%].
*Has there ever been a BBWAA path as strange as Sheffield’s track? 5 straight elections of basically absolutely no movement, two big jumps, then another year of exactly the same percentage, followed by another big jump. Jeff Kent’s weird path may be close.
6t) Carlos Beltran: 181/389 [46.5%]; Tracker 111/207 [53.6%]; Residual 70/182 [38.5%]; 1st year. The election of Beltran to the Baseball Hall of Fame by the BBWAA is inevitable. It is just a question of how long it will take. In this, his first year, the anonymous (presumably more judgmental) voters docked him just 15.1% compared to the public voters. Hardly much more than the usual 12.6% fadeaway. This is presumably an indication (and not a really loud one) that the more conservative voters are holding Beltan accountable for his role in the Houston Astros 2017-2018 sign stealing scandal. But stealing signs is a crime as old as the game of baseball itself. This off-season, the rehabilitation of Beltran continued with his hiring by the New York Mets (the team that fired him when the scandal erupted). Has any player ever gotten 46.5% of the vote by the BBWAA in their 1st year and then never made it into the Hall of Fame? Beltran could be elected next year. However, it seems more likely that Beltran gets to the verge and then is elected in 2025 [Path 2023: 1-46.5%].
6t) Jeff Kent: 181/389 [46.5%]; Tracker 107/207 [51.7%]; Residual 74/182 [40.7%]; 10th and final year. The anonymous BBWAA voters cast their ballots for Jeff Kent at a rate 11.0% under the public BBWAA voters. This is probably completely due to the Small Hall convictions of the anonymous voters. In any event, Kent’s election is now out of the BBWAA hands. He will soon appear in front of a HOF Veteran’s Committee. His chances of being elected by a Hall of Fame by one of these Committees (eventually) is probably assured. Jeff Kent (all-time leader in Home Runs by a second baseman) seems exactly the type of player one of these Fred McGriff (almost 500 home runs) and Harold Baines (almost 3000 hits) loving Baseball Hall of Fame sub-committees can really get behind [End of Path 2014-2023: 1-15.2%; 2-14.0%; 3-16.6%; 4-16.7%; 5-14.5%; 6-18.1%; 7-27.5%; 8-32.4%; 9-32.7%; 10-46.5%].
8) Alex Rodriguez: 139/389 [35.7%]; Tracker 80/207 [38.6%]; Residual 59/182 [32.4%]; 2nd year. Rodriguez has probably no chance of ever getting into the Hall of Fame through a BBWAA vote [and probably probably should not even be included in that sentence]. His multitude of proven beyond a doubt steroid scandals (and allegations of even more) plus his extensive attempts to cover up his crimes will always be an anchor dragging his candidacy down into the depths. Like Bobby Bonds & Roger Clemens before him, the only question of A-Rod’s candidacy is whether he will get close to the 75% threshold required for election. It will be interesting to see if Rodriguez can surpass either Bonds or Clemens final (and highest) vote totals [66.0% and 65.2% respectively]. If he does, it will be a disgrace. His sins are far greater than anything that they ever did. Unlike them, A-Rod actually failed mandated steroid tests, and then he lied and scammed to cover up his sins. Strangely, A-Rod lost only 6.2% of his vote in 2023 when the anonymous votes were counted. This is probably because the Small Hall argument does not apply to him at all. Rodriguez was (absent the proven allegations of steroids) an inner-circle small Hall of Famer already. In other words, his slight decrease must all be due to the anonymous voters being judgmental [Path 2012-2023: 1-34.3%; 2-35.7%].
9) Manny Ramirez: 129/389 [33.2%]; Tracker 76/207 [36.7%]; Residual 53/182 [29.1%]; 7th year. In many ways, the results of the 2023 BBWAA Hall of Fame for Ramirez simply duplicated the outcome of the election for Alex Rodriguez. The percentage of anonymous voters casting their ballots for Ramirez against the percentage by the public voters went down by just 7.6% (compared to the 6.2% lost by Rodrigues). Assuming that all the voters (anonymous and public) also considered Ramirez an inner-circle Hall of Famer, these percentages must just represent the basic debit for coming to the election with a serious stain on your reputation. In other words, the “Small Hall Argument” does not even apply. That being said, there is a huge difference in value between these two players. Baseball players need to play defense too. A-Rod’s good to great defense at shortstop and third base was much more valuable than Ramirez’s “wandering-in-the-desert” outfield play. In fact, modern statistical analysis basically values Rodriguez as almost twice the player that Ramirez used to be. Of course, this is reflected by the fact that Rodriguez, only in his second year, is ahead of Ramirez, who is in his 7th. Regardless of this, both players are on a rocket ride to nowhere. They will eventually fall totally off the BBWAA ballot and into Baseball Hall of Fame Veterans-type Committee oblivion. Just three more until Ramirez is cast into the outer darkness [Path 2017-2023: 1-23.8%; 2-22.0%; 3-22.8%; 4-28.2%; 5-28.2%; 6-28.9%; 7-33.2%].
10) Omar Vizquel: 76/389 [19.5%]; Tracker 17/207 [8.2%]; Residual 59/182 [32.4%]; 6th year. The difference in the public and the anonymous results for Vizquel is pretty startling. Rather than fading by the usual 10 percent (or so) between the known and the unknown, Vizquel surged by 24.2%. Some of the anonymous surge is certainly because public voters are more likely to believe that Vizquel is not statistically worthy. Traditional voters, who probably make up most of the Vizquel supporters, are more likely anonymous. But this is not really a baseball result but a cultural one. Currently, there is a large and quite vociferous cultural movement [the so-called Me Too Movement] that believes that any claim against a man for being abusive should be treated as true until disproved [the complete opposite of: innocent until proven guilty]. So there is a pressure on anyone who posts their ballot publicly that does not exist at all for the anonymous voter. Why take abuse when you don’t have to, especially for a candidate right on the line like Vizquel? All this being said, the evidence that Vizquel physically abused his now former wife and also sexually harassed a bat bay is pretty damning. There is a good argument that it would be much more prudent to wait and see if the allegations are proven or not (or perhaps even multiply). In the previous post, it was stated that Vizquel looked like he might fall below the 5% threshold for remaining on the 2024 ballot. That may have been the worst prediction in that post. The anonymous surge took him safely out of the danger zone. But his election by the BBWAA is still doomed. Like the steroid guys, Vizquel has been left to take up space on the ballot and twist in the wind until his ten years of eligibility are up [four years to go]; and then he will fall into Veterans Committee oblivion. However, if this 2023 Hall of Fame election showed anything, it demonstrated that there is obviously a anonymous core of support for Vizquel well north of the five percent needed to keep him on the ballot until his 10 years are finally up. [Path 2018-2023: 1-37.0%, 2-42.5%, 3-52.6%, 4-49.1%, 5-23.9%, 6-19.5%.]
11) Andy Pettitte: 66/389 [17.0%]; Tracker 35/207 [16.9%], Residual 31/182 [17.0%]; 5th year. The candidacy of Andy Pettitte is a puzzle. The support for Pettitte is equally distributed between the public and anonymous voters. But, since there was no fade, it could be argued that the more progressive public voters are less committed to Pettitte than the more conservative anonymous voters. His admission that he used Human Growth Hormone [HGH] is pretty obviously being held against him almost equally. Like Mark McGwire, Pettitte has the arguments of transparency and accountability going for him. He did not deny or lie about taking HGH. He was doing it for what would be, in the real world, a noble purpose. He took HGH to help recover from injury so that he could: 1) help his team and 2) earn the salary that he was being paid. But this doesn’t seem to be helping him at all. Neither does being a Yankee and having a pretty stellar post-season career. Pettitte seems to have the mix of qualifications that would appeal to both progressive and conservative voters. His lack of support is really a mystery. Pettitte should, at the very least, have the same support as Rodriguez and Ramirez, both know steroid users (and, in Arod’s case, a history of denial and lying and and other nefarious actions that probably should outright disqualify him). In 2023, Pettitte did finish with his highest percentage yet. However, this is may just be due to spots opening up on BBWAA ballots because of all the players who dropped off the ballot after the 2022 election. The theory would be that these dropouts (Pettitte friend & source of pain Roger Clemens and others) leaving freed up their spots for a borderline candidate like Pettitte [Path: 1-9.9%, 2-11.3%, 3-13.7%, 4-10.7%, 5-17.0%]
12) Bobby Abreu: 60/389 [15.4%]; Tracker 38/207 [18.4%]; Residual 22/182 [12.1%]; 4th year. Public voters gave Bobby Abreu 6.3% more love than their anonymous counterparts. Under the theory that public voters believe more strongly in modern statistical analysis than their anonymous peers, this makes complete sense. Abreu is possibly the quintessential modern statistical player. He was never the best player in the league (or probably on his team). Abreu didn’t lead the League in any of the flashy categories [HR-RBI-BA etc]. He did do the underrated things, including drawing an absolute ton of walks. If there ever was a star baseball player who faded into the scenery to the extent that Bobby Abreu did, the search party has not located him yet. Despite all this, he forged a respectable Hall of Fame claim through modern measurements. It is said that: the furrther into the past the memory of a player’s career goes, the more the statistics matter. If that is true, Abreu’s vote totals should continue to increase. But, if the pace doesn’t pick up soon, Abreu will simply run out of time for his election (at least by the BBWAA). The most likely outcome seems to be that his vote total will continue to increase (perhaps into 30-40 percent land). But eventually Abreu will be lost in the Baseball HOF Committee forest [Path 2020-2023: 1-5.5%; 2-8.7%; 3-8.6%; 4-15.4%].
13) Jimmy Rollins: 50/389 [12.9%]; Tracker 25/207 [12.1%]; Residual 25/182 [13.7%]; 2nd year. Anonymous voters favored Rollins by 1.6% over their more public brethren. By modern statistical analysis, Rollins is just a borderline Hall of Fame candidate. However, to a voter relying more on traditional methods, Jimmy Rollins looks quite a bit better than that. He had a long career and he accumulated good counting stats. His actual offensive prowess was reduced by his reluctance to accept a base on balls. Rollins played shortstop well but was not among the very top fielders at his position. Rollins had a very good and valuable peak. He won the MVP award in 2007 when he knocked out 38 doubles, 20 triples, and 30 home runs while playing all 162 games. But, aside from his 2004-2008 peak, he was often just an average player. When he won his MVP award, Wins Above Replacement actually rated him as the ninth best player in the League. Rollins led his league four times in triples, once in runs scored, and once in stolen bases. He was very durable. He played on various contending teams and one World Series winner. All in all, his career ended in the gray area between the actual Hall of Fame and the Hall of almost Famous enough players. Interestingly, Rollins has one thing in common with the other three guys on the bottom of the 2023 election results (players 13 through 16). They all had more support from the anonymous voters than the public voters. Whether he will continue to languish down near the bottom, fall off the ballot entirely, or begin to rise up is unknown. If pressed for a prediction, this blog believes he will rise but never get over 50 percent [Path 2022-2023: 1-9.4%; 2-12.9%].
14t) Mark Buehrle: 42/389 [10.8%]; Tracker 21/207 [10.1%]; Residual 21/182 [11.5%]; 3rd year. Like the rest of the players on the bottom of the list, Mark Buehrle received more votes from the anonymous voters (by 1.4%). Buehrle rebounded nicely from damn near falling completely off the ballot in 2021. His fall from an initial 11.0% to 5.8% in his second year with a nice rebound to 10.8% this year (it seems to indicate that Buehrle may have been the last man on a multitude of ballots (i.e. listed 10th or 11th). Whatever the reason, it is good to see him survive to possibly be elected another day. In many ways, he is the pitching equivalent of Bobby Abreu. Buehrle was competent and very valuable but he was not flashy at all. He pounded the strike zone and did not beat himself. His early retirement ensured that he had no chance to pile up more statistics and make his Hall of Fame argument stronger. But it should already be strong enough. Like Abreu, Buehrle’s lack of pizzazz is probably going to keep his vote totals from rising very far. It’s a shame [Path 2021-2023: 1-11.0%; 2-5.8%; 3-10.8%].
14t) Francisco Rodriguez: 42/389 [10.8%]; Tracker 20/207 [9.7%]; Residual 22/182 [12.1%]; 1st year. In his first year, Billy Wagner received 10.5% of the vote. His vote totals didn’t even really start to rise up until his fourth year on the ballot [Of course, a bunch of unelected steroid abusers were clogging it up]. Now, eight years later, Wagner is on the verge of being elected [with a 68.1% share]. In his first year, Rodriguez got 10.5% of the vote, doing slightly better than Wagner. Just looking at their traditional statistics as ace relievers, Wagner doesn’t really look all that better than Rodriguez.* And Rodriguez is basically the “Roger Maris” of ace relievers, holding the single season record for saves with 62 in 2008. If Wagner gets elected, the candidacy of Rodriguez will almost surely get a large boost because of their obvious similarities. On the other hand, Wagner was pretty clearly the better pitcher over his career if one analyses his statistics closely (in the regular season). The prediction here is that Francisco Rodriguez has just begun a long and productive run on the BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballots. He will probably either get real close or set himself up for eventual Committee selection for election. Like the rest of the candidates at the bottom of the ballot, Rodriguez got a greater share of the anonymous vote [Path 2023: 1-10.8%].
*Rodriguez: 52-53 W-L, 948 games, 976.0 IP, 1142 SO, 2.86 ERA and 437 saves vs. Wagner: 47-40 W-L, 853 games, 903.0 IP, 1196 SO, 2.31 ERA and 422 saves.
16) Torii Hunter: 27/389 [6.9%]; Tracker 7/207 [3.4%]; Residual 20/182 [11.0%]; 3rd year. Torii Hunter’s candidacy was saved by the 2023 anonymous BBWAA voters to once again grace the ballot next year. If left up to the public BBWAA members, Hunter would have sent packing (their 3.4% was slightly under the 5.0% required to survive). However, the anonymous BBWAA members voted at a rate of 11.0% for Hunter. Only Omar Vizquel, for obvious reasons, had a greater positive differential [24.2%] than Hunter [7.6%] between votes cast by the unknown and the identified. The next largest percentage in favor of the anonymous over the public votes was just 2.4%. So the obvious question is: What do the anonymous voters see in Torii Hunter to make them vote for him at a rate three times greater than the public voters? Using modern statistical analysis, Hunter is a borderline Baseball Hall of Famer. It can be argued that his traditional statistics make a better HOF case for him (his main weakness was that not walking much). Hunter certainly was famous enough and also had the requisite charisma to appeal to the less numerically obsessed. Even though his (probably) most famous play was a failure, Hunter would have to be given credit for the extreme effort.* But, realistically, this large difference in support between anonymous and public voters seems inexplicable. Maybe it is just random. He had only 7 public voters who believed in his candidacy against 20 anonymous ones. But just 27 total votes total is hardly a majority that speaks with great authority. Perhaps current Torii Hunter HOF supporters simply prefer anonymity. Who knows? It will be very interesting to see if this pattern holds from year to year [Path 2021-2023: 1-9.5%; 2-5.3%; 3-6.9%].
*In the 2nd game of the 2013 American League Championship Series, Hunter flipped completely over the low wall separating left field from the bullpen in Fenway Park while chasing a David Ortiz grand slam home run. It was epic.
Closing Observations: The Attendants
So what conclusions (if any) can be drawn from looking at and analyzing the public versus the anonymous votes in the 2023 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame election? In general, there seem to be 3 distinct classes of candidates. The class with lowest vote totals could be called the “Attendants.” These players could be said to be in the Hall of Fame “waiting room” (so to speak). Oddly, the one thing that all the Attendant HOF cases currently have in common is that more of the private voters are in favor (percentage-wise, at least) of their candidacies. This is quite strange. All of the other candidates, with one very unique exception, received much more support from public voters rather than anonymous ones. It almost seems like the public voters have not yet actually considered the Attendants. Of the 16 surviving candidates, 5 can be classified as Attendants. In order of their anonymous versus public percentages, they are: 1. Torii Hunter [+7.6%]; 2. Francisco Rodriguez [+2.4%]; 3. Jimmy Rollins [+1.6%]; 4. Mark Buehrle [+1.4%]; and 5. Andy Pettitte [+0.1%]. By total votes in the 2023 BBWAA election, they finished 11th [Pettite] and 13 through 16th of the 16 total candidates. The Attendants seem to be just waiting for their HOF cases to be noticed by the public voters and catch fire. The Attendant with the greatest chance of igniting in 2024 is probably Francisco Rodriguez. It will be interesting to see, if his candidacy rises, whether it is fueled mostly by the public voters beginning to consider him more closely.
Closing Observations: The Exiles
The second class, the 3 players with the the 8th through 10th vote totals in the 2023 BBWAA Hall of Fame election, could be called the “Exiles.” These 3 candidates could be said to be completely outside the HOF Arena. But some of the crowd are throwing them bouquets over the walls. Because they were caught and suspended during their careers for using steroids, Alex Rodriguez and Manny Ramirez are simply marking time on the ballot. Perhaps they will get another chance in some distant future [when steroids have been proven not to enhance performance and carbohydrates shown to make you skinny]. The one fascinating aspect of looking at their public and anonymous votes is that the private voters were actually not much more judgmental than those voters who published (just 6 to 7 percent worse). Since neither player should have been affected by “Small Hall Syndrome” at all, anonymous voters barely held more of a grudge against them than public voters did. It seems like they have a core of support unaffected by known or unknown votes. Not that it will help them any. There is obviously also a core of non-supporters, greater than 25%, which will always block their election. There is also one other guy in the Exiles: Omar Vizquel. But he is a complete unicorn. Supported by just 8.2% of the public voters but a whooping 32.4% of the private voters, there is no one else like him on the ballot. Evidently, Vizquel (like Ramirez and A-Rod) has a core of supporters, no animosity of the anonymous there, that will keep him on the ballot until the clock runs out. But there also seems to be a large group of non-supporters, who do not condone wife beating or autistic people molesting, that will always block him. The Baseball Hall of Fame’s decision to let these 3 candidates twist in the wind for ten years almost seems like a form of added punishment, a type of mental torture.
Closing Observations: The Contenders
The final class of 2023 BBWAA Baseball HOF candidates should be called the “Contenders.” These are the players whose HOF cases are really currently in play by the BBWAA. They are (or they were in the case of Jeff Kent) all making progress every election towards being elected. It could be said that they are in the Arena. The top 7 vote getters in the 2023 BBWAA HOF election were all in the class of Contenders. Each of these players has greater support from the public voters than the anonymous ones [at least 9.3% more support]. This is a complete reversal from the Attendants, the candidates who are on the bottom of the list. This indicates that the public voters are the engine that drives the BBWAA vote. In other words, a BBWAA HOF candidate will rise to the top of the election when the public voters take his HOF case seriously and begin to vote for him. It remains to be seen whether the anonymous voters are swept along in the wake of this phenomenon. It will be very interesting to see if the gap between the public and private voters closes next year for Andruw Jones. If it does, this would almost certainly mean that the private voters are leading the charge with the anonymous voters following along afterwards. If it does not close, this would indicate that the private voters are resisting the choices of the public voters (and not buying into Jones’s marvelous fielding metrics). These 7 Contenders, in order of the smallest percentage difference between their public and their private vote percentages, are: 1t. Scott Rolen [9.3%]; 1t. Billy Wagner [9.3%]; 3. Jeff Kent [11%]; 4. Todd Helton [13.9%]; 5. new to ballot Carlos Beltran [15.1%]; 6. Gary Sheffield [16.6%]; and 7) Andruw Jones [18.3%]. Whether a high difference [Jones/18.3%] or a low difference [Wagner/9.3%] is more advantageous in the next election will (hopefully) be revealed in 2024.
Closing Observations: Next Year and Future Posts
There is one more player among the remaining 16 active HOF candidates who was not discussed above: Bobby Abreu. He finished 12th in the 2023 BBWAA election. Unlike the other bottom of the ballot finishers (#11-16), Abreu did not receive more anonymous votes than public ones. In fact, Abreu had 6.3% more public supporters than private ones. Was this the start of Abreu’s rise in the HOF ballot as the public voters begin to scrutinize his case? There is a lot to like in Abreu’s career. But it is hidden behind a uncontroversial and quiet façade. Have the public voters finally begun to notice that he is actually quite worthy? If this is true, Bobby Abreu has now joined the “Contenders” and his vote total should jump in 2024. It will be something to watch closely in 2024. Of course, everything discussed above is all about the inner workings of the BBWAA HOF election process. But it doesn’t address the larger issues at all. One of these issues [Why is the BBWAA HOF election structured as it is and can it not be improved?] will be analyzed in the next post on the Hall of Fame [Part 2]. After looking at that, the even bigger picture [How can the entire Hall of Fame process be improved?] will be addressed [Part 3].
Addendum #1
One of these things (well two actually) is not like the others: Public Votes- Abreu 38, Pettitte 35, Rollins 25, Buehrle 21, Rodriguez 20, Hunter 7. Private Votes- Pettite 31, Rollins 25, Abreu 22, Rodriguez 22, Buehrle 21, Hunter 20.