Joe Posnanski

This is too cool. My head is exploding. I might comment more later.

Bonds and Maddux make the list but Clemens doesn’t?

Charles, Clemens has no place here.

Clemens was a very good pitcher for a very long time. Top-ten, probably, top-twenty for sure. Bonds is top-five, and if you squint just so, competes for number one. There is no comparison. Oh, except in the public jerkwad sweepstakes. There Clemens is neck and neck with Bonds as a public figure (I reserve judgment on reality: this sweepstakes goes entirely by appearance).

My solution to the Robinson question is easy: I rename it the Jackie Robinson Hall of Fame. Then Ruth, Mays, Wagner, Bonds, and coinflip for Maddux/Johnson. Here we really want The Pedro or Mathewson, in that order.

Some musings…

I find it hard to believe Pete Rose wasn’t even mentioned. And it IS interesting that Clemens wasn’t mentioned either especially since “How the hell did he just beat me” Maddux. (I actually had him on my fantasy team this year and he won a few for me) was on there.

I agree with your sentiments on Pedro from 1997-2003 at the absolute PEAK of the roid era, here’s this stick of a guy throwing whiffle balls. Incredible. Believe it or not it was hard to leave him off my personal Mount Rushmore of ball players because if I had one game to win and could have any pitcher at their prime Pedro would be on the hill for me.

You mentioned the games Jackie missed due to well, racism. I often think of the war years Ted Williams missed. Easily would have had 600 hr’s. How many hitters have has 200 hits and over 100 walks in a season. Williams and Ruth made a habit of it.

Great saturday post Joe!! And I must say you’ve got this life long Boston fan rooting for KC.

Oh and WAYYYY off subject - Can Shaq just go away now? MDE? I don’t think so. And if Ewing has Kobe in New York instead os Starks I dare say they might have won a couple.

note related to my comment above: I got into baseball in ‘82… during Bly’s career. I was so young and new to the game though, that I couldn’t tell the difference between a HOFer and Keith Hernandez.

That was impossible. I chose the stat route over all else:

Bonds
Ruth
Walter
Honus
Ted

All have a claim at the best ever in my opinion.

I went with Ruth, Gibson, Aaron, Wagner, and Cobb. If either Pedro or Grove had been on the list, I would have voted for them. Being utterly dominating pitchers during the most offense-tilted periods in the game’s history makes them elite.

This was fun. I voted for Cobb, Ruth, Gehrig, Johnson and Ted Williams. Although I went back and forth with Wagner and Aaron instead of Gehrig and Williams. I’m still not sure if leaving Aaron off was the right choice. That’s what made it so fun!

As for Robinson, I understand the extenuating circumstances. But if I were to rank the best second basemen of all-time he would probably come in behind Rogers Hornsby, Charlie Gehringer and Eddie Collins. And you would certainly be able to mention Nap Lajoie in that conversation. Gehringer, in particular, is an interesting comparison because he had a similar 7-8 year stretch in his career starting at age 29 where he was above outstanding, won an MVP and led his team to 3 World Series (winning one). Jackie had more speed, that is for sure. Jackie also only really played 5 seasons at 2B, so I’m not sure if it’s a fair comparison at all. But when I think of him, I think of 2B.

As for Blyleven, I totally agree. I’ve had this conversation with a former writer who never voted for him because “eh…he never seemed like a Hall of Famer to me”. He also said he wouldn’t vote for Rickey Henderson on the first ballot because he wasn’t a nice guy. Ugh!

That was…wow. After staring at the screen for 10 minutes and arguing and switching votes, I decided to uncheck all of the players I had already voted for, take a deep breath, and accept the fact that no matter how I filled out my ballot I was going to be unhappy with the players I left off.

I also wanted to do a couple of things with my votes. I wanted to be representative of several eras: if this was going to be the introductory class of the new Hall of Fame, then I liked the idea of the five acting as sort of a “time machine” to introduce all visitors to the entire era of baseball.

I also wanted to take pains to go with my gut whenever I started overthinking things. Here then are “my 5″:

* Babe Ruth- baseball’s first ever super-duper-uberstar. Even if we took away the “specialization” of today’s game, how many players of today could be both a good-to-great pitcher and the absolutely no-doubt-about-it home run king of this era? Rick Ankiel, if he could get rid of the yips? Carlos Zambrano, if he played in the American League where he could DH every 4 days and pitch every 5th? Not a chance. The thought is laughable.

* Ted Williams and Joe Dimaggio- besides being incredible players, these two seem linked at the hip as symbols of the 40’s and 50’s. Hard to mention one without the other, (although I see Joltin’ Joe is performing VERY poorly in this poll.)

* Hank Aaron- The most consistent power hitter of all time, despite playing through the entire low-offense 1960’s. Another man who is iconic, and larger than just the game; the image of him hitting 715 and rounding the bases is one of the top 10 videos you would show to any new baseball fan. Considering that he had to perform while dealing with probably more than Roger Maris had to during his home run chase? To use the new basketball parlance: Hank Aaron was a “grown-ass man”.

* Greg Maddux- When you consider that he pitched through the Steroid Era, with postage stamp strike zones, while not being able to throw 100 MPH, and spending most of his career having to pitch his home games in the launching pads of Wrigley Field, Fulton County Stadium, and Turner Field, and has won a jaw-dropping 350+ games under those conditions, there’s a very good argument to be made that Maddux is the greatest starting pitcher of all time.

Do I feel bad leaving off Willie Mays, Cy Young, Barry Bonds, and Josh Gibson? Yes. There are a hundred ways to fill out this ballot and they would all feel “right”. I’m VERY interested to see how this turns out.

I went Ruth, Wagner, Mays, Bonds, Maddux. I was about to go Williams instead of Maddux, but I realized that would duplicate my dad (Bob R, above), and I couldn’t abide that.

It’s “Three Finger Brown” for the same reason you might wear a “ten gallon hat.”

Roger Clemens is one of my least favorite players of all time, but I believe he belongs here. Considering league context, he might be the greatest pitcher in history. I don’t think so - I choose Walter Johnson - but the argument isn’t insane.

Interesting. I ended up voting for the 5 players that currently are at the top of the poll. Aaron, Ruth, Johnson, Mays, Williams, and that is the order that I rank them. I didn’t expect that.

The tough thing here is that I didn’t select any infielders, and only 1 pitcher. Gibson, Maddux and Wagner would be my next 3 picks. Luckily this is a HOF selection, and not a fantasy team because sooner or later someone would have to pitch and catch the old horsehide.

I love this blog, keep it up.

For the record Pete Rose would make my top 15. As my father says If Pete Rose isn’t in the Hall of Fame, there shouldn’t be a hall at all.

I echo the sentiments of many here; this is nearly impossible. I went with Johnson, Mays, Ruth, Williams, and Young. Cobb and Wagner would be my 6th and 7th, for what it’s worth.

This is a hard ballot. I actually didn’t take that long to fill it out but I felt bad leaving out so many people.

You could fill this out in every different way and probably be right and defend your picks as true.

Though I can’t help but feel some people got looked over. My first thought was wait! where’s Tris Speaker (my personal favorite baseball player) then I read the comments and there’s Hornsby, Gehringer, Charleston, Bell, and many more that I’m neglecting to mention.

Then the actual ballot itself.

Ruth
Gibson
Young
Aaron
Wagner

I’m uncomfortable leaving off so many great players but I feel like that comes with the territory.

Ruth
Williams
Bonds
Maddux
Gibson
(in that order)

I’d have voted for Clemens in place of Maddux if he’d been on the list. I was surprised he received no recognition from your 25 participants, and was surprised there was no Oscar Charleston mention (especially from Bill James).

Alphabetically because at a certain level it is more about taste than empiricism.

Aaron,
Mays,
Robinson,
Ruth,
Young

I would have no problem defending these five against any others, but there are one or two others I would put in the same tier (Cobb, Johnson, Gibson and Williams*)

*In my book you get extra points for becoming a fighter ace when you are called away TWICE to active military service. Williams is closest to cracking my top five.

I went with Ruth, Mays, Williams, Robinson, and Gehrig.

As far as Pete Rose goes, while I think he should be in the Hall of Fame, he, to me, is a clear “compiler” in his later years. He had some great years but by his late 30s he was mediocre at best. He wasn’t hitting for average and was hitting for even less power. So yeah, I’d put him in the Hall, but I’d never consider him on a top 5 or top 15 list.

It’s amazing how many people overlook Frank Robinson. He has to be (one of) the most overlooked great(s) in baseball history.

I had no trouble with the first three:

Ruth
Williams
Mays

…….

I added Gehrig

…….

Then I tossed in Aaron.

To me the first three compose a seminal tier. After that, there is wiggle room. Maybe a pitcher, maybe Cobb or Barry instead of the Horse or Hammerin.

How about sharing with us the names of the voters? Would be interesting just to see who participated.

Bit of a pro-hitters bias here. 9 of 25 players mentioned on any ballot were pitchers, and only 3 of the 15 named on multiple ballots. Kind of striking that a panel of people who know baseball exceptionally well would conclude that only one pitcher of the last 75 years deserves consideration as one of the very greatest players ever. I’m not even saying I disagree, it’s just notable.

Joe, I hope you’ll leave this balloting open for a couple days. This could take a while.

I decided to go for 3 hitters & 2 pitchers. I would have liked the opportunity to think about Brett&Schmidt, and Clemens, but I doubt it would have made a difference. I picked Ruth, Mays & Bonds. I have some questions about the dominant current myths about the individual importance and personal uniqueness of Jackie Robinson, although he was a superlative ball player, no question about it. Also, I have no doubt that Josh Gibson was a hugely great player, and Oscar Charleston too, but maybe we need to accept that we’ll never know what might have been, and we do know what was. And who doubts the wonderfulness of Hank Aaron. I guess I emphasized hitting over D, but so did the original voters.

Pitchers was harder. Are those the 3 best? I don’t think I would have come up with that list. I think I’m influenced by the Maddux Lament too — and I’ve read that Johnson had a good fastball & they say Cy Young won a lot of games

I went for Babe, Willie, Big Train, Bonds, and Honus… and then got frustrated with myself for voting too quickly and leaving off Williams. I’m slightly surprised at how much love Aaron is getting; I, like Blackadder, see him as a step below the Ruth-Mays-Wagner sort of player (not that he wasn’t awesome). But yeah, it’s really really hard to just pick 5 guys.

Yeah, if we burn down the Hall and start over, really, no Pete Rose? not even a mention?

And if we look at Jackie Robinson for baseball plus - not even a mention of Curt Flood?

IIRC, Three Finger Brown technically had 3.5 fingers.

I would also like to hear an explanation from people who left Ruth off. Do people think segregation dilutes his mythos that much?

Ruth, Mays, Williams, Robinson, Young.

It’s hard to leave Aaron off. He wasn’t just a guy who got stats by hanging around a long time.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/a/aaronha01.shtml
How did he only win one MVP?

I’d have voted for Clemens.

Where are Brooks Robinson and Cal Ripken, Jr.?

Nasty two part problem.

“If you could start over, who would make up your Hall of Fame first class?”

Which I translate as - define your hall of fame standards, then pick your first five players from this deck of fifteen.

I decided to focus primarily on on field merit - ie. how much did they contribute to winning ballgames. That’s immediately going to nuke Robinson, but I think that’s appropriate, given the seed list we’ve been offered. Which is to say, if the Hall of Fame should be about players as historical figures (clumsy short hand), then I don’t think we a drawing from the right pool at all.

Similarly, with Berra missing, I don’t feel like I have to play “Count Da Ringz” with DiMaggio.

The three pitchers get set aside - comparing pitchers to players just confuses things; instead, I’ll pick the top hitters, then decide if the best pitcher should bump the bottom man on the list.

Next peel Ruth Bonds Robinson and Gibson off the deck. That leaves me with eight guys to guess on. Wagner and DiMaggio are clearly the weak links there, and a quick squint tells me that Robinson belongs in that pile. Gibson goes with him.

So Ruth is in, and after that Bonds is easy - he’s either #2, or out of the pile completely. I chose in, which meant I was picking 3 of 6. Wiliams was easy (perhaps wrong, but easy), and Aaron and Cobb round out the field. Essentially, it came down to “which player makes the least sense as sixth best - I decided that Gehrig or Mantle as #6 was fine, it was Aaron Cobb Mays that were making me crazy. Spin a coin.

I never bothered choosing a pitcher, since I didn’t feel like any of them belonged at number 6,

I think a hall that starts Ruth Robinson could be pretty interesting, I just have trouble finding three more players in this list that belong in that set. Aaron, I suppose, and then…?

Jackie could easily have won four straight MVP awards, 1949-52, instead of just the one in 1949. To be fair, Stan Musial could have won them too: the two of them were by far the best players in the league those years. But, it seemed NL MVP voters were looking for strange reasons to give people awards in those years. In 1950, the Phillies won, so they gave it to…not Richie Ashburn, not RBI guy Del Ennis, not 20-game winner Robin Roberts, but reliever Jim Konstanty. Hey, he won 16 games! One of the odder choices. Then, in 1951, the Giants won at the end, so a Dodger couldn’t get it. In 1952, the Dodgers won, so it went to…Hank Sauer. Hank Sauer? Fine hitter, led the league in HR and RBI, but on a sixth-place team. Another odd choice.

I voted for Ruth — I mean, c’mon — and I also voted for Honus Wagner. There’s a real argument to be made that Ruth was the greatest, not just best but greatest player in baseball history. Start with his hitting — all time home run leader until recently, massive value as a hitter. And he was better than the other right fielders of his time, as well as pretty much every other right fielder in baseball history. Cribbing from the Bill James Historical Baseball Abstrace, Ruth’s three best seasons by Win Shares were 55, 53, and 51 — no other right fielder on James’s top 100 list had as many as 50 in his best season. Ruth was worth about 18 win shares per 162 games — or about 5-6 wins per season, depending on the length of the season — more than the #2 guy on the list, Hank Aaron. Nobody else comes close.

Now, I’m not a big fan of the concept of ‘dominating’ greatness, but if you’re voting for Ruth because he was that much better than every other guy, then I don’t see how you can avoid voting for Wagner. Honus Wagner’s best season by Win Shares? 59. Yep, more than Ruth’s best season, though Ruth’s top three combined are better than Wagner’s top three combined. Here’s the thing, though — no other shortstop on the list had more than 40 Win Shares in a season at the time the list was drawn up. (Alex Rodriguez has almost certainly had a season or two that good since then, but not as a shortstop.) On a Win-Shares-per-162 game basis, Wagner (38.01) simply blows away other ‘no doubt’ Hall of Famers like Cal Ripken (23.63), Ozzie Smith (20.53), and Derek Jeter (25.35 — this total was as of the publication of the book and has certainly changed since then). Wagner even has more career Defensive Win Shares than Ozzie Smith (141.84 to 139.84); Smith is generally considered one of if not the greatest defensive shortstop ever. How is Honus Wagner not one of the five greatest players ever to play the game of baseball?

I voted for both Mays and Mantle, since there are arguments for both as greatest player of all time as well, and I didn’t feel I could penalize either of them (or both of them).

Finally, I voted for Walter Johnson, because I find James’s argument in the HBA persuasive: the only pitcher in history who can beat Johnson in effectiveness per inning pitches is Lefty Grove, but Johnson pitched way more innings than Grove, while the only pitcher to beat Johnson in number of effective innings was Cy Young, but Johnson was more effective in his innings than Young was in his. Every other starting pitcher in baseball history (except perhaps Pedro Martinez) loses to Johnson in both categories — they weren’t as effective as Johnson and they were less effective in shorter careers.

I can see where people would vote for Ted Williams, or Hank Aaron, or Jackie Robinson; I don’t see where you can vote for any of those guys ahead of Honus Wagner, which given the vote totals, a pretty significant percentage of voters appear to be doing. I can accept that there’s more competition if you re-build the Hall starting today than there was in 1936 when they first started building the Hall — heck, I am myself leaving Cobb off my ‘ballot’, and Christy Matthewson, who was also among the original five, isn’t even eligible for this vote. But I can’t see how a guy who got on over 95% of the ballots when every player in baseball to that point was effectively on the ballot is carrying just 21% of the ballots today with only fourteen other guys.

i voted too fast, and admittedly don’t know enough about some of the old-school players like wagner, cobb, gibson, johnson.

as such, i voted: ruth, mays, aaron, robinson, mantle.

after reading all these comments (and reading up a bit more on the likes of cobb), i would probably switch out mantle for cobb if there was a cmd+z on here. though i can’t say i completely regret voting for mantle (why has he only received 10% of the vote? he seems pretty amazing to me).

voiceofunreason makes a valid point in that robinson is the only player in this lot to be chosen for mostly historical reasons, which makes me regret voting for him the most. i’d like to switch him out as well, probably for honus or bonds.

but, too late; my robinson and mantle votes are here to stay.

still, it’s pretty interesting that 4 of my 5 votes are in the top 5, considering i am still relatively young, don’t know a lot of baseball history and was only able to watch two of these guys play during my lifetime.

I don’t like just five players inducted first. Perhaps the first time I’ve disagreed with JoeBlog on something. I say if the HoF didn’t exist until right now, and I’m running the show, then I’m having the first group of players inducted be the best Nine of all time. I’d have a ballot for each position, and the top vote-getter obviously wins.

Then I’d vote for Walter Johnson, Johnny Bench, Lou Gehrig, Eddie Collins, Mike Schmidt, Honus Wagner, Stan Musial, Willie Mays, and Babe Ruth.

There’s your inaugural group.

Yes, please give us the name of the 25 voters, none of whom mentioned Rogers Hornsby. Who could possibly overlook someone who averaged .400 over five years, one of which included 40 home runs. Ruth, who forever changed the game of baseball, Cobb, Hornsby, Johnson, and Aaron.

Come on, Jackie Robinson in the top five? Are we all collectively a Tavis Smiley guest under the direction of Mr. Pos? There is nothing i can say (obviously) to immunize myself against the political correctness/courage argument for the wonderful Mr. Robinson. But no way do you keep out any of the true giants for affirmative action sake - it’s not a travesty for Mr. Pos, who probly wouldn’t himself give Robinson the nod, maybe maybe not, but come on…

Ruth, Williams, Mays, Bonds, Mantle

Mantle not getting much love.

.298/.421/.557…172 OPS+…536 homers…3 MVP awards…9 top 5’s

Better peak than Mays.

Ruth.

Honus Wagner - I have never met, heard, or read anyone that had anything negative to say about his baseball skills. People either know him or don’t. Those who know about him say he is one of the 5 greatest. David Wintheiser in the comments above writes more about Wagner is a must read comment.

Cy Young - 511 wins even pitchers in his own era couldn’t come within 100 wins of him except for…

Walter Johnson - 416 wins while playing for some horrible teams.

That leaves me with one spot: Jackie could go here but then there were so many people that had a hand in him breaking the color barrier, no the least of whom was the GM Branch Rickey but looking at just performance.

I thought Ted Williams but then went with Willie Mays and here’s why: played Center Field, a far more demanding position, is arguable the greatest defensive and offensive player at his position. Could run as well. Played in a much tougher hitters park than Williams as well. The definition of the complete package.

Williams was one dimensional and was other worldly in that dimension but not enough to compensate for his deficiencies in other areas.

Call me wishy-washy, but I can’t vote on this (and I even voted for Chipper for the All-Star game this year (I live in NYC)), I can’t leave off some of these guys. And how could 25 experts leave off Musial? I respect the symmetry of a first class of 5, but that was covering essentially 35 years of play, plus the early days of the National League, so shouldn’t there be at least 15 spots available?

Thinking about this has led me into some weird facts. I knew that Ted Williams never actually had 200 hits in a season, but I never knew (or forgot, or wasn’t paying attention) that Cap Anson didn’t either. And Bonds has 7 MVP’s while Clemens has 7 Cy Youngs? And the only multiple winners of either award not in the Hall that are eligible are Dale Murphy, Roger Maris, Denny McLain, and Bret Saberhagen?

The thing that irks me about the Hall is that it doesn’t do enough to help add to the Fame of those who for whatever reason didn’t garner enough of it on their own. If it is just supposed to recognize baseball fame, then they can stop at Ruth, Gehrig, etc., fine. But if it is supposed to be a place to trumpet the fame of those who excelled beyond others at baseball, then I think that it falls short, which isn’t exactly surprising, for I have the same complaint about many sportswriters*, and who puts people in the hall? It frustrates me when I read about how some great talent or story is going unrecognized, and what a shame it is, and all I can think is “It’s your fault, you and your brethren!”. The whole post-season after Freddy Sanchez won the batting title leaps to mind.

*And for something completely different (thinking about sportswriters brought it up) I would love to try and find out more about sportswriters from the past who would be the equivalent of irresponsible bloggers in the eyes of Buzz, like Col. Dave Egan who made things very unpleasant for Ted Williams.

incidentally, i’d vote for jackie robinson first ballot with no problem based on his career even aside from his historical significance.

let’s call it the koufax/puckett rule… if your career was short for some reason, it doesn’t change how great it was if you accomplished enough. but i suppose it’s worth noting that (as an accomplished yankee-hater) i wouldn’t be heartbroken if mattingly got in. i mean, i saw the guy play and he dominated for a half-decade. it’s good enough for me and it’s the same reason i’d put davey concepcion in the hall (i challenge you - find a better ss from 73-83.)

i’m babbling here. i also think it’s a travesty that blyleven isn’t in the hall. so that shows what my opinion is worth.

I voted for Cobb, Gehrig, Johnson, Ruth, and Williams. I’m second guessing my pick for Williams although I can’t believe Rogers Hornsby wasn’t on the ballot. I would have voted for him very easily. He was the first power hitter of the NL, won 2 triple crowns, and put together 5 consecutive years where his combined avg was .400. Maybe the greatest feat ever.

Cobb is obvious, Johnson is as well as he had a 2.17 career ERA and won over 400 games playing for the worst team in the AL. Ruth would have made it as a pitcher if they hadn’t figured out he could hit. The one that really bothers me is the fact that Gehrig is low on the balloting. He played 14 full years and had 1995RBIs. That’s sick. He hit .340 and had a year with 20 triples and didn’t sit out a game until it was time to die. Not only that, he was all class. The fact that he isn’t getting recognized is blasphemous. I’ll vote for Bonds when hell freezes over.

Where’s the love for Josh Gibson? Possibly the greatest hitter ever and played most of his career AS A CATCHER. maybe not as good as Biz Mackey (or Campy) defensively, but good in his own right, plus mammoth power, ability to hit for average and get on base.

Love this topic. I was, however, flabbergasted to find Wagner with only 21% of the vote, which is conclusive proof that 79% of us are freaking insane. I might suggest that those who did this off the cuff go take a look at Wagner’s stats, and consider them in the context of the Deadball Era. If I’m not mistaken, Wagner’s 1908 season was rated the best season in baseball history in terms of Win Shares (although I believe Barry may have surpassed him). Anyway, the man was a remarkable player. And he was also one of the greatest defensive shortstops of all time. There were a couple of commenters who noted that they discounted Wagner’s defense because there wasn’t enough information. This is wrong. Both the statistical and anecdotal evidence are in overwhelming agreement that Wagner was a superb defensive shortstop.

Feeling sentimental after reading Joe’s post, I voted for Robinson even though he clearly doesn’t belong with the rest of this group baseball-wise. After that, I picked Ruth, Wagner, Gibson, and Johnson.

Disappointed as I was that Wagner hasn’t received the type of support he merits, I was encouraged to find that the voters have correctly identified the one player on the list (other than Jackie) for whom there is no legitimate argument whatsoever to rank in the top 5 — that being Joe DiMaggio,

Regardess of the result of Joe’s poll of his buddies, it would have been nice to see Satchel Paige and Lefty Grove on the ballot. Both of those guys can be very reasonably argued to be the best pitcher who ever lived, and thus, among the top 5 players. Not saying I would have picked them, but they should have been on the ballot. As should Clemens and Pedro Martinez. Pedro doesn’t have the career length, obviously, but he’s far and away the best pitcher of all time in terms of peak value. That’s gotta be worth something.

Ruth first, daylight second, then it’s a crapshoot.

No, Bonds hasn’t had a season of more than 59 Win Shares - I think he peaked around 54 in 2001. Which is still ridiculous, but Wagner still has the best year (or at least the best year since the mound was moved back; plenty of pitchers had more than 59 Win Shares in the 1880s).

To those responders who ask why Robinson is on so many first ballots, it’s not called the “Hall of Quality” or the “Hall of Value.”

This should be determined Family Feud-style, ask 100 yokels what old-timey ballplayers they’ve heard of.

My list was for the most Famous on the list:
Ruth: duh
Young: if you’ve heard of a pitcher who’s won a Cy Young, you’ve heard of him
Williams: spent most of his quality years dropping bombs on Nazis and Commies
Mays: all the annoying Boomers won’t stop yakking about how great he was; as our generation ages and tells our kids about ‘01 and ‘04, this slot will probably be replaced by Bonds (Sorry, haters)
Robinson: Parkways, ballfields, stamps, … Nobody goes to Honus Wagner Elementary School

In order of confidence:

1. Ruth
2. Mays

3. Robinson - Remember the point of the exercise is to re-establish the Hall of Fame, not necessarily identify the five greatest players ever. Robinson was at the center of major league baseball’s finest hour. His singular circumstances have to be taken into account.

4. Wagner

5. Johnson - So hard to fill out the fifth spot. Williams was my #6, and also considered Schmidt and Gehrig. In the end I felt like I had to include a pitcher. It feels wrong to say that three of the five greatest players ever had their peak years before the Depression, and the last fifty years of baseball have produced none of the greatest players ever. But that’s my ballot.

Among active players I could obviously see A-Rod on this list someday.

I also considered Pedro and Koufax, mistakenly thinking they were on the final ballot. In the end I would have valued longevity and voted for Johnson anyway. But if you had to win that mythical one game to save your life, I think I would take peak Pedro and peak Koufax over Johnson. At his best, Pedro would have my vote as the greatest player of my lifetime.

I would also make a brief argument for Yogi Berra. Best ever at his position, ten championships, called basically every pitch of every game for the most dominant team ever, possibly the most loved character in baseball history. I’m surprised he wasn’t mentioned even once by the original 25 voters.

Great exercise. Good excuse to pull out James’s HBA. This was fun.

Damn, I love this blog!

And it’s been great reading the various voters’ ballots.

It says something about just how wonderful the game of baseball is.

If I could afford it, we’d all convene at a ball game together and I’d just want to sit next to most of you to watch and talk about the game. I disagree with some of your choices but I can’t argue with ‘em.

Okay, I’ll argue.

Pete Rose belongs in the Hall as a player, and deserves to be banned for life for his actions as a manager. I’m not sure how to work out those logistics, but that’s what I think.

Whoever posted the dream lineup up-thread, pretty much described Heaven for me. Wonder who they’d play?

As much of a George Brett fan I am, I saw Brooks Robinson play third base. Brett was such a blue-collar guy, he worked his way to be a complete player… batting practice ’til his hands bled and so much better at third base than anyone expected… but watching Robinson play third base was like watching Picasso paint.

And people such as Bob Gibson; why did people bother to bring a bat up to the plate? They weren’t gonna use it.

It’s the history of the game that makes baseball so wonderful.

If Jim Thorpe or Red Grange were plopped into a contemporary NFL game, they wouldn’t recognize it. But if Cobb or Ruth or Walter Johnson or Satchel or Teddy Ballgame somehow would show up for this afternoon’s game, they wouldn’t miss a beat.

I’d love to sit next to just about everyone who’s involved in this blog during a ball game. We’d disagree about Shrub and Iraq and taxes and maybe everything else, but we’d love this game together.

Wow, over 1,000 voters. That’s a pretty high number. Glad you decided to keep this site going.

I had Wagner, but bumped him off to get Johnson on there.

Great question though.

TheDawg makes an interesting point, but not one I think I can support: the idea that the Hall shouldn’t be as much about quality of player but about…well, fame. To demonstrate why I’m not convinced this is the way to go, let me tweak the original premise and instead name the five guys I think would be in the inaugural ‘Hall of Fame’ if fame and impact on the game were more significant criteria for selection than just baseball ability. (Not that we’re going to accept just anybody — heck, on this blog nobody’s more famous than Duane Kuiper, but he ain’t getting in.)

1. Babe Ruth - Great player, arguably the most famous baseball player of all time.

2. Jackie Robinson - Extremely talented player, made one of if not the most significant change to the game in its history.

3. Hal Chase

As a player, Hal Chase wasn’t great — he was good. His peak value according to the BJHBA puts him a bit below John Kruk, who was pretty darned good as his peak, while his career value rates about the same as John Olerud. Neither of those guys would get into the Hall on talent alone, but Chase has an edge: Hal Chase was arguably the most famous player of his era, even more famous than Ty Cobb. What he was famous for was his defense, which people raved about as legendary, and the suspicion that he was throwing baseball games, losing deliberately in order to make extra money on the side from gamblers or just to convince his owners to raise his salary. Chase was ultimately banned from baseball for throwing games — ironically in 1919 just before the infamous Black Sox series was played — but if you could measure a player’s Fame Quotient, Chase’s would be near the top, at least for his time.

4. Shoeless Joe Jackson

The most famous player in the most famous scandal in baseball history, which led to changes in the game which arguably exceeded Ruth’s — the establishment of the commissioner’s office, rules about the relationship between gambling and baseball. Heck, it’s been argued that, though American society at the time was awash in corruption, it wasn’t until Shoeless Joe got kicked out of baseball that people really started to take seriously the idea that they could and should clean things up. In that sense, Jackson’s (and to a degree Chase’s) legacy is nearly as large as Robinson’s, in that what Jackson did (or arguably didn’t do) had an impact well outside the world of baseball into the greater culture of the time.

5. Barry Bonds

We knew there were steroids in the game long before Bonds and ‘Game of Shadows’; Jose Canseco was openly proclaiming the virtues of steroids during his playing days, and Mark McGwire had