San Francisco Giants second baseman Jeff Kent fields a ground ball off the bat of Arizona Diamondbacks’ Craig Counsell during the third inning Tuesday, May 28, 2002, in San Francisco. (AP Photo/Justin Sullivan)
Copyright 2002 AP. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
The MLB Contemporary Era Committee voting results were made public Sunday evening, as they elected only slugging 2B Jeff Kent from their eight-man ballot. Kent received 14 of a possible 16 votes, clearing the 75% barrier required for election by two votes.
This was quite the star-studded eight-player group being considered by this committee. It featured Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Carlos Delgado, Gary Sheffield, Dale Murphy, Don Mattingly and Fernando Valenzuela. The vote totals are quite illuminating – Delgado placed 2nd among the group with nine votes, Murphy and Mattingly both got six, and the other four players received less than five votes and will thus be ineligible to appear on the next Contemporary Era ballot in 2028. They may again be considered in 2031 in the next three-year cycle, but one more such result would make them ineligible for future Contemporary Era ballots.
That’s a pretty big deal, for a number of reasons, which I’ll discuss in a bit. First, let’s give Kent his due. He wasn’t the best player on this ballot – far from it. But once you get past Bonds and Clemens, he’s arguably as deserving as the rest. For me, either Sheffield or Kent would be next. Sheffield is the better hitter, Kent played a position where his offense set him apart by a greater margin. He wasn’t a great defensive second baseman, but he was at least average. You really can’t argue against his inclusion, though I never got the sense that there was any real constituency arguing for it.
That’s not the case with Murphy and Mattingly, two guys with great off-field reputations that back up their flawed but impressive Hall credentials. Murphy was clearly left behind by the game’s steroid era, but I’d also argue that he never made the necessary adjustments at the plate – like his contemporary Mike Schmidt did – once he first encountered extended adversity and his physical tools began to ebb.
With Mattingly, it’s simply injuries that have kept him out this long. A healthy Mattingly would have been a first ballot guy. But his body of work falls short of typical HOF standards, especially for his offense-rich position.
Delgado was a fearsome power hitter, but his numbers didn’t stand out as much in his era. He added very little in the way of complementary skills, and seems to be on a Fred McGriff-esque track that will eventually see him enshrined. He won’t be unworthy when that happens, but a Hall without him would also be understandable. Valenzuela is more “famous” than he was “great”. I honestly don’t see him as a particularly exciting candidate.
This brings us back to the elephants in the room – Bonds and Clemens. They clogged up the Baseball Writers’ ballot for the entirety of their respective eligibility periods, with large blocs of writers both enthusiastically supporting and vehemently opposing them. They’re seen as either among the very greatest ever or cancers upon the game’s past, or both, and never came all that close to clearing the 75% bar required on that ballot as well.
Now it appears that it’s the Contemporary Era Committee’s turn to wash their hands of the two. Gears grind slowly in popularity contests such as these, and if they are fortunate enough to be named to the ballot in 2031, they’re not getting in, and very well could find themselves boxed out forever. It’s a shame.
The way I look at the players who had “help” from foreign substances is this……did they need it to be in the Hall? McGwire? Yes. Sosa? Yes. Palmeiro? Most likely, yes. Bonds and Clemens? Are you kidding me? They’re clear Hall of Famers without performance enhancers.
One last observation about this process. It’s pretty darned flawed. The 16 voters can only vote for three of the eight players on the ballot. That’s 48 total votes. A player needs 12 votes to get in. By design, there are no weak players on the ballot. We’re going to have plenty of years when no one gets in. The maximum number of players that can get in is four, and that’s if no one else gets a single vote. One player got more than nine votes this year – and for some reason it was Kent, pretty clearly not the best player on the ballot. It would seem that the rules are going to need to be tweaked further – maybe allow committee members a higher number of “yes” votes – to get the desired results, which I hope is to add as many worthy Hall of Famers as possible.
So congrats to Jeff Kent. Hang in there, Carlos Delgado, Don Mattingly and Dale Murphy – your day may still be coming. But to the others, especially Bonds and Clemens, it’s not looking good. The Contemporary Era Committee has spoken, and have said the same exact thing the BBWAA did.