Here are some great reads from around the web about Barry Larkin, who will be inducted into the Baseball HOF:

Barry Larkin a consummate professional (Jim Bowden, ESPN.com)
Barry goes into the Hall of Fame this weekend as his era’s best NL shortstop, but he’s also going in because of his high character, integrity, family values and all of the championship-caliber insight he gave the organization -- his only organization -- throughout his career. On behalf of my family, congratulations to you, Barry, on achieving the ultimate accomplishment for a major league baseball player...MORE

Larkin's underrated greatness goes beyond place among shortstops (Cliff Corcoran, SI.com)
There wasn't anything Barry Larkin didn't do well on the baseball diamond, and he upheld similar standards off of it, winning the 1993 Roberto Clemente Award, which recognizes involvement in the community, and 1994 Lou Gehrig Award, which recognizes character and integrity...MORE

Larkin persevered through doubt to reach Hall of Fame (Jack Etkin, MLB.com)
Larkin was a complete player, a Hall of Fame talent, as it turned out. He reached the Reds after a brief apprenticeship in the Minors. Larkin was so gifted, it's hard to imagine he ever questioned his ability. But he did...MORE

Larkin the quite superstar (Bill Lankhof, Toronto Sun)
If baseball had a Lady Byng Trophy, Larkin would be your candidate. He is, perhaps arguably, one of the 10 best shortstops in baseball history. But, having played in a small-media town, away from the glare of big city notoriety, he is also one of baseball’s best-kept secrets...MORE

MLB cincinnati reds, barry larkin, hall of fame

In his third year on the ballot former Reds’ shortstop Barry Larkin was voted into the National Baseball Hall of Fame by the Baseball Writers' Association of America, receiving more than 86 percent of the vote.

After missing out the last two seasons, Larkin will be inducted during ceremonies on July 21-22 in Cooperstown.

The 12-time National League All-Star shortstop and three-time Gold Glove Award winner, won the NL MVP award in 1995 and helped lead the Reds to a World Series championship over the A’s in 1990.

The .295 career hitter won nine Silver Slugger awards and helped redefine the position in advance to the arrival of names such as Derek Jeter and Alex Rodriguez.

He becomes just the 48th Hall of Famer to spend his entire career with one organization. He is just the third Hall of Famer to spend his whole career with the Reds, joining Johnny Bench and Bid McPhee.

Larkin was the first shortstop in history, in 1996, to join the 30-homer, 30-stolen bases club. He hit at least .300 in nine of his 19 seasons, and wound up with 2,340 hits, 198 homers and 379 stolen bases.

WCPO's John Popovich takes a look at Barry Larkin's career as a Red:

MLB cincinnati reds, barry larkin, hall of fame, cooperstown

We recently got some good feedback on a blog post concerning Jack Morris as a Hall of Fame candidate...

Let’s stick to the facts:

Jack Morris was the WINNINGEST pitcher in the 1980s.

He was known as Big Game Jack.

Nobody had better overall statistics than Jack between 1978 and 1993, whipping Bert Blyleven over that period, and better than Nolan Ryan, Tom Seaver, Carson Palmer, Ron Guidry, etc.. Probably because the hitters were extremely tough over that period, HOFers struggled!!!!!!!!

In fact, Jack Morris had 20 more victories than his nearest counterpart during the 1980s and over 40 more than his nearest counterpart during the period 1978-1993. That is not amazing, it's unbelievable!!

The American League East was toughest division run-wise (take off .5 to 1.0 runs compared to the National League) so his E.R.A. is mitigated when adjusted for league.

During his career, the experts considered Jack the BEST Pitcher of his era.

Jack was key to three different teams winning the World Series; the Tigers, Twins, Jays.

Jack had the greatest performance in modern era, the 1-0, 10 inning performance, game 7 World Series vs. Twins.

Nobody was tougher on the mound than Jack Morris, who stayed in game under conditions of getting hit hard, duress and fatigue. GRITTIEST EVER.

Jack Morris was a clean pitcher unlike Gaylord Perry, Phil Niekro, and Don Sutton who are renowned to have been. And none of those guys were the best pitcher of their generations or even close. In addition, Niekro was rarely best pitcher on his OWN TEAM.

So Please guys, do not show your lack of intelligence by using a statistic or two in a meager attempt to REWRITE HISTORY!!

Saying he does not belong because of his run support is like saying Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, Steve Young or Tom Brady don't belong because of the teams they played on were tremendous, so don't include them.

To put it all in perspective, compare Bert Blyleven to Morris over the period 1978-1993 and you will realize how prejudiced you are because Jack was a boor!

-from Steve Mark

MLB hall of fame, jack morris

ESPN.com's Jayson Stark argues Barry Larkin's candidacy for the Hall of Fame...

Barry Larkin is one of the greatest shortstops who ever lived. Period.

I'm not sure why this is a fact lost on most of the non-Ohioans on our fine planet. But it's a fact I can assure you is 100 percent true. And because it's true, you should also know this:

Barry Larkin is a Hall of Famer. An easy Hall of Famer.

That doesn't mean he'll go sailing into Cooperstown next week on the first ballot, of course.

COMPLETE ARTICLE

****
Check out another great argument in favor of Larkin from a few years back by Aaron Gleeman.

MLB hall of fame, barry larkin, cincinnati reds

from New York Daily News:

Thanks to the behind-the-scenes lobbying from some of the most influential Hall of Famers, commissioner Bud Selig is said to be seriously considering lifting Pete Rose's lifetime suspension from baseball.

The tip-off that Selig may now be inclined to pardon baseball's all-time hit king was Hank Aaron's seemingly impromptu interview session with a small group of reporters in the lobby of the Otesaga Hotel on Saturday. In declaring for the first time that he would want an asterisk put on the achievements of any steroid cheats elected to the Hall of Fame, Aaron brought up Rose, who, in August of 1989, was given a lifetime ban for gambling on baseball, saying: "I would like to see Pete in. He belongs there."

It is no secret that Selig considers Aaron one of his closest friends and values his opinions over perhaps all others. It was also learned by the Daily News that in a meeting of the Hall of Fame's board of directors at the Otesaga later on Saturday, two of Rose's former teammates on the board, vice chairman Joe Morgan and Frank Robinson, also expressed their hope that Selig would see fit to reinstate Rose.

COMPLETE ARTILCE

MLB hall of fame, pete rose, hank aaron, bud selig, joe morgan, frank robinson

Curt Schilling announced his retirement from baseball on Monday on his blog, ending a remarkable career. We all remember the bloody sock and the fact he was one of the first in the game to call out some of the steroid users in the game. Schilling seemingly is never lost for words and was always ready to take the ball, even when he didn't have his best stuff.  His playoff performances alone are enough to stick out in voters' minds when it comes time to decide to put in him in the Hall of Fame, but does he belong there?

He has just 216 victories. Other pitchers that have struggled to get in the Hall have shown more. Bert Blyleven (287) and Jack Morris (254) and Tommy John (288) and Jim Kaat (283) can't get in and each of them won more game. Also, Schilling didn't win a single Cy Young Award, coming closest in 2001 when he was runnerup to teammate Randy Johnson. He was also second to Johnson in 2002 and to Johan Santana in 2004.

Still, if I had a vote I would put him in.  Larry Stone of the Seattle Times pointed out some great arguements to put the big right-hander into the HOF:

--He's been an ace, or co-ace, on three highly successful teams -- the 1993 Phillies, which lost in the World Series; the 2001 Diamondbacks, which won the World Series; and the 2004 Red Sox, which won the World Series. He also contributed three postseason wins to the 2007 Red Sox, which won another World Series.

--As Jayson Stark pointed out last year in making a case for Schilling, he led all right-handers of his era in complete games (83). Only Pedro Martinez had a better strikeout ratio (8.59 K/9). Only Pedro and Roger Clemens had more overall strikeouts than Schilling (3,116). Only Pedro and Greg Maddux had a better WHIP than Schilling (1.137). And Schilling's strikeout to walk ratio (4.38 strikeouts for every walk) is No. 1 among all pitchers of the modern era, left or right.

--Schilling won won 20 games three times, had three seasons of 300 or more strikeouts, pitched 20 shutouts, was a six-time All-Star and co-MVP of the 2001 World Series.

--What really puts Schilling over the top is his postseason performance. Two words: Bloody Sock. In 19 postseason games, covering 133 1/3 innings, Schilling went 11-2 with a 2.33 ERA. The only starter in history with over 100 IP with a lower career ERA is Christy Mathewson (Granted, not many pitchers have reached 100 ip in the postseason). The winning percentage is No. 1. If Hall of Fame cases can be made for Morris and John Smoltz based on postseason success -- and they have, and will -- then Schilling surpasses both.

--Tim Marchman of the New York Sun wrote last June: "What gets a bit overlooked is that had Schilling never pitched a playoff game, he'd still be a deserving Hall of Famer. His topline numbers are terrific - 216-146 with a 3.46 ERA, 3,116 strikeouts - and they get better the more you look at them. When adjusted for park and league effects, for instance, his ERA is as good as Gibson's or Tom Seaver's, and he has the highest strikeout-to-walk ratio in modern history. Only two eligible pitchers have won at least 200 games with a winning percentage exceeding Schilling's .597 and not eventually made the Hall, and one of them, Carl Mays, isn't in mainly because he killed someone with a pitch."

--As Jim Salisbury of the Philadelphia Inquirer pointed out last June, Schilling also had the intangibles that define a Hall of Fame player.

MLB red sox, phillies, diamondbacks, curt schilling, hall of fame, cooperstown

I have to say, I was a little surprised by the results of the Hall of Fame voting results today.  Obviously Rickey Henderson was a cinch to get in, but I didn't expect Rice to make it as well; I'd figured that his case had become so polarizing that there weren't going to be any defectors from the anti-Rice camp.  But, he slid in on his 15th and final ballot.  As I said a couple weeks back, I don't think he's worth induction, but he's hardly the worst player in the Hall, and he won't devalue induction any.

Andre Dawson's support (67.0%) seemed a bit higher than it should have been, especially in comparison to his former teammate, Tim Raines (22.6%).  Bert Blyleven continues to pick up votes (62.7%), and he'll probably get the call in the next few years.  Jack Morris' support continues to baffle me (44.0%), again considering the low vote totals for his former teammate (and in my mind more deserving candidate) Alan Trammell (17.4%).

David Cone should have gotten more than the 3.9% that he garnered, and will fall off the ballot, along with Tommy John (final year of eligibility), Mark Grace, Matt Williams, Mo Vaughn, Jay Bell, Jesse Orosco, and Dan Plesac.  And the whole Mark McGwire issue (21.9%) isn't going away anytime soon.

Looking ahead to Cooperstown...well I'm excited, as he once told Padres GM Kevin Towers, to hear "Rickey speaking on behalf of Rickey".

MLB hall of fame, ricky henderson, jim rice, bert blyleven, andre dawson, david cone, tommy john, mark grace, matt williams, mo vaughn, jay bell, jesse orosco, dan pleasac, mark mcgwire

Rickey Henderson, the greatest leadoff hitter ever, and quite clearly one of baseball's all-time greats, was appropriately elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame.  The only question is, why did 28 of the 539 voters NOT vote for him?  What more are they looking for in a candidate?  It's likely the fact that his cockiness rubbed a few writers the wrong way, because it sure can't be his career numbers that they deemed less than acceptable. 

It will be interesting to see if Greg Maddux, as clean and professional as any ball player, gets a full 100% of the vote.  Probably not, and when the time comes, those that pass him over should be made to justify his absence from their ballots.

MLB baseball, hall of fame, cooperstown, rickey henderson, greg maddux

"I'm not surprised by the career he had. He had a knack on how to play this game. He was a delight to watch. It didn't make a difference who the pitcher was." - Expos broadcaster Jim Fanning.

THE NUMBERS

2502 G, 2605 H, 1571 R, .294 AVG, .385 OBP, 808 SB

The final of the 23 Hall of Fame candidates reviewed here seems to be the most puzzling case of all of them.  Tim Raines was one of the best leadoff hitters ever, and incredibly exciting on the basepaths.  He ranks fifth all-time in stolen bases.  Doing some research on his case of the Hall of Fame, I couldn't find a single persuasive case for why he's not Hall-worthy.  And yet, he garnered less than 25% of the votes needed for induction in his first year of eligibility last year.  So, I guess this will be just another article on the internets about why he belongs in the Hall of Fame.

Raines broke through as a 21 year old left fielder with an exciting young Montreal squad in the strike-shortened 1981 season.  He immediately established himself as a fixture in left field, alongside the previously reviewed Andre Dawson in center field.  His speed terrified catchers and fielders alike, as he stole 71 bases in just 88 games and 313 at-bats (for perspective, in 1982 he had 647 at-bats; at his 1981 rate, he would have stolen 146 bases).  His .304 average and .391 OBP were pretty impressive as well; those numbers earned him the runner-up spot in the NL Rookie of the Year voting, behind the phenomenon that was Fernando Valenzuela.

Things continued this way for the next several years.  From 1981-1986 he stole at least 70 bases each year, and other than an off-year in 1982 his average never dipped below .298, nor his OBP below .393.  Despite all of this, he received absolutely zero offers as a free agent after the 1986 season.  He later found out that this was because of owner collusion.  Nevertheless, he returned to the Expos on May 1st of 1987, and with no spring training, hit .330, with 18 home runs, 68 RBI, 123 runs scored, and 50 steals in just 139 games.  His .429 OBP and .526 slugging percentage both placed him in the top 10 of the NL, an impressive feat for a leadoff man.

Injuries curtailed his production in 1988, and from there he hit .300 only once more.  After two subpar seasons of just 41 and 49 steals in 1989 and 1990, he was dealt to the White Sox.  He was productive in Chicago for a few years before his body began to break down somewhat.  Traded to the Yankees, he succeeded in a part-time role for three seasons and earned two World Series rings before signing with Oakland in 1999.  Early in a very poor season, it was discovered he had lupus, and for all intents and purposes his career ended there (though he did recover enough to return to the majors and play with his son for the Orioles in 2001).

Raines finished his career with the fifth most stolen bases in history, with 808.  Of the ten players in MLB history with 700 steals or more, only three are not in the Hall - Raines, Vince Coleman (who by Hall standards was a very poor hitter), and Arlie Latham (who seems to be a 19th century version of Coleman).  His batting record is clearly not that of an empty hitter; of the non-Hall players with 500 or more steals, only Barry Bonds could be considered a better hitter than Raines.  He led the league in steals four times and runs twice, and finished in the top five nine and four times, respectively.  He made the All-Star game seven consecutive years.

So what's the case against Raines?  Well, he did have an issue with cocaine early in his career, which some voters tend to look down on.  After age 27, he only played 150 games in a season once, and just three times made it through 140 games.  His second half of career was not nearly as productive as his early career - that's a fair point as well, though given his first half, most players would have found that hard to live up to.

One of the other criticisms that I've seen levied against him is that he didn't finish high in the MVP voting often enough.  Well, some of that has to be written off to playing north of the border.  There's no other explanation of why he finished 19th in 1981 with a .304-5 HR-71 SB line, while Dave Concepcion and his .304-5-4 line finished in the top 5.  The voters decided that Mike Schmidt's 40 HR's and .255 average were more valuable than Raines' 90 steals and .298 average in 1983.  Plus, he continually finished behind inferior players who seemed to get bonus point for having played on playoff teams (Gary Matthews in 1984, Tommy Herr in 1985, Glenn Davis in 1986).  I don't think this is a legitimate argument against him.

Raines compares very favorably against Hall members with more than 400 steals, but one comparison in particular that seems appropriate is first ball Hall of Famer Lou Brock.  After all, both were known primarily as speed players.  But, here's what they looked like compared against each other, as well as another Hall member who Raines bears similarity to.

Player	G	AB	R	H	HR	RBI	BB	K	BA	OBP	SB	CS
Raines	2502	8872	1571	2605	170	980	1330	966	.294	.385	808	146
Brock	2616	10332	1610	3023	149	900	761	1730	.293	.343	938	307
Player C	2683	10835	1782	3319	234	1307	1094	1244	.306	.369	504	131

By all accounts, the only areas where Brock was superior to Raines were in volume categories.  And that's not to say that longevity shouldn't be rewarded; milestones are important.  But it's clear that Raines was simply a better hitter than Brock.  He had more power, scored more often, struck out far less, walked far more, got on base more, and stole bases more successfully than Brock (Raines' success percentage is the highest among players with more than 300 steals).

Player C in this comparison?  First ballot Hall of Famer Paul Molitor, who is a step above Raines as a hitter, but not so far above that the 300 steal difference doesn't make up for it.  Quite simply, Raines compares well to two deserving first ballot inductees.  I don't see any reason why he should not be given the courtesy of induction himself.  Unfortunately, it looks like that will have to wait a while, since he's likely to actually lose votes this year because of the inclusion of Rickey Henderson.  Eventually, it should come, and it will be well deserved when it does.

MLB hall of fame, tim raines, lou brock, paul molitor

Two of the four remaining pitchers deserve something between a few sentences and a full post, whereas the other two don't merit much discussion.

Tommy John

Surprisingly, beyond having a revolutionary surgery named after him, there's a case to be made in favor of John's induction.  His career numbers are pretty strong: 288 wins, 3.34 ERA, 2245 strikeouts.  From 1977-1981 he was as good as any pitcher in baseball, winning 89 games and finishing 2nd in the Cy Young voting twice.  He led the league in shutouts three times, and his 6-3 post-season record is pretty impressive as well.

But that's about where it ends for him.  Despite the relatively high number of strikeouts, he never whiffed more than 150 batters in a season.  And it's fair to say that, for his last six seasons, he was pretty much hanging on.  There was just nothing that ever screamed spectacular about him.  Plus, baseball-reference.com lists Jim Kaat as the pitcher in baseball history most similar to John.  I'd say that's a pretty fair characterization; Kaat was a very good pitcher, like John.  He's not a Hall of Famer, and John shouldn't be either.

Lee Smith

The hard part of evaluating Smith's career is that the role of the closer has changed so much in the last 20 years, that we're still in the early stages of figuring out how to identify the elite vs. the very good closer.  So the question immediately becomes, how do you evaluate Smith's save numbers?

He's had ten 30 save seasons, and ranks third all-time with 478.  Smith finished 802 games (most all-time), and appeared in 1,022 games.  He was definitely a power pitcher, striking out almost a batter per inning. 

On the flipside, he never seemed to be the dominant reliever in baseball during his career, and given that there are currently just four relief pitchers in the Hall, that may turn out to be a big issue.  He won three Reliever of the Year awards, but none until 1991 when he was with the Cardinals.  He played for eight different teams, which might turn off a few voters (he did have a reputation of being a bit of a malcontent).  And then there were his two post-season appearances, both of which he lost a game and contributed to crushing series losses for his team.

Honestly, I don't know what to do with him.  Smith, in a lot of ways, strikes me as a Jeff Reardon that was able to extend his prime for a couple more years.  I'm not sure that's good enough.  Maybe in time, his numbers will start to look better, but for now I'd leave him out of the Hall.

Jesse Orosco

The all-time leader in games pitched...and that's about it.  He was a nice lefty specialist...nice lefty specialists don't make the Hall of Fame.

Dan Plesac

Here's a good way to reduce the membership of the BBWAA.  Anyone that votes for Plesac, strip them of their vote.  Should not, under any circumstance, get any consideration. 

MLB hall of fame, tommy john, lee smith, jesse orosco, dan plesac