Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Frank Thomas Elected to Hall of Fame, Craig Biggio Just Misses

hall of fameToday, the results of the much-discussed Hall of Fame balloting for the 2014 class was released by the BBWAA, and, to the surprise of none, Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, and Frank Thomas got the call, each on his first year of eligibility.

If Glavine’s enshrinement was a no-brainer – and it was – then Maddux’s was some kind of super, robot-level no-brainer. Although there were dings on Thomas – he spent so much time at DH, he missed so much time in his later years, some other stretch of a thing someone can come up with – he, too, was a clear Hall of Famer. Among his amazing stats? How about 1667 career walks against just 1397 career strikeouts?

Maddux received 97.2% of the vote (meaning Ken Gurnick was not the only person who omitted Maddux – there were 16 writers who did it. Though I’d bet that most of the rest of the folks who didn’t vote for Maddux didn’t vote for anyone). Glavine was at 91.9%, and Thomas was at 83.7%

Missing from the list of honorees, once again, is Craig Biggio, who was named on 74.8% of the ballots. The cutoff for enshrinement is 75%. He missed by one vote. Ouch.

Biggio remains an interesting case, even moreso now with new-ish whispers of a PED connection, which seem – right now – to be specious and unfair. Biggio didn’t do many things great, but he did everything well, and he did them for a very, very long time. Did you know that he stole 50 bases at age 32?

Other bits of note:

  • Sammy Sosa falls to 7.4%, though he’ll remain on the ballot another year.
  • Mike Piazza actually topped Jack Morris, 62.2% to 61.5%.
  • Barry Bonds received just 34.7% of the vote, and Roger Clemens received just 35.4%.
  • When the BBWAA server returns to functionality, you can see the full results here.

Brett Taylor is the editor and lead writer at Bleacher Nation, and can also be found as Bleacher Nation on Twitter and on Facebook.

165 responses to “Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Frank Thomas Elected to Hall of Fame, Craig Biggio Just Misses”

  1. Diehardthefirst

    All good players but shouldn’t HOF be for better than good?

  2. ClevelandCubsFan

    Jaques Jones. Seriously. Who voted for him? I am not and never was Jones hater. Kinda rooted for him to succeed. But seriously?

    1. baldtaxguy

      Again, this is another example where there should be some sort of responsibility required of the voters and when you violate that responsibility, you should not have the privilege. The motivation for such a vote can only be that someone is not taking a flawed process seriously. This beyond the “everyone is entitled to one’s opinion” crap. There needs to be some sort of system of accountability for the voters.

      1. cub-hub

        I disagree. Basically what you are saying is that the Hall should control who the voters vote for. If that’s the point, what the point of having voters. I agree, Jacque Jones should never recieve a vote, but a writer feels different, I have no problem with it.

  3. wv23

    The sanctimony is deep here (and elsewhere) today.

    It is utter crap that writers “didn’t know” about steroids in the ’90s. I wrote a paper in high school in 1988 about steroids and baseball (and recycled it a few years later for a college assignment).

    These weren’t some unheard of substances that the ever-so-sneaky baseball players were putting over on people. Not at all.

    The writers went along for the ride, building, building, building up the heroes – until external forces created the opportune time to tear them down.

  4. Diehardthefirst

    Hall of Fame would become hall of shame if known PED users allowed in … Don’t know why Biggio excluded .. If based on performance against Cubs he would’ve been 100%

    1. Norm

      Known PED users are already in.

      1. cub-hub

        And just because wrong has been done does not mean it should continue.

        1. Norm

          It’s only “wrong” in your opinion.
          In my opinion, the best players should be in, period.
          It’s not like people are going to forget that Bonds and Clemens used PED’s, just like we all know that Ty Cobb was a racist who beat up a guy that didn’t have any hands and that Gaylord Perry wrote a book on cheating yet was STILL inducted and that greenies and PED’s have been in baseball since at least the 1950′s.

          1. cub-hub

            Why do people continue to bring up Ty Cobb. Him being a racist did not give him a competitive edge. I would rather have 1000 racist in baseball than 1 steroid user.

            1. jh03

              “I would rather have 1000 racist in baseball than 1 steroid user.”

              No way. Players ALWAYS try to get a competitive advantage. That doesn’t make them terrible people. Being racist? Yeah, that does. Especially how racist Cobb was.

              It’s really not even close.

              1. cub-hub

                Right. But MLB baseball is not a game that has rules on being terrible people. It does have rules against trying to gain a competitive advantage illegally. This is America. People have a right to love and hate what ever kind of people they want, as long as they don’t violate there rights. In America, the improper use of steroids are and always will be illegal.

                1. jh03

                  If you threw out every player who attempted to gain a competetive advantage, in some way, from the Hall of Fame.. you’d have about Greg Maddux left..

                  Players do what they can to help the team win. Whether it’s scuffing a ball, taking drugs to help them focus, getting LASIK, or taking drugs to help them stay healthy (because that’s the main effect PED’s actually have). For some reason the last of the group is deemed so bad while the others people shrug off.

                  I hope you’re not an NFL fan.. because you wouldn’t be able to tell your kids about a single player, outside of some kickers.

                  1. Scotti

                    Steroids didn’t help Bonds and Big Mac stay healthy. Quite the contrary. Both were injured as a direct result of steroids. And, while muscle recovery from fatigue is a benefit of doing steroids, the major benefit of even that aspect of steroid use–for hitters–is building muscle mass.

                    To your main point, the “competitive advantage” of steroid use is so far and away greater than any other PED that comparisons are laughable. 50 HR per year was commonplace! The record for all-time HR, and single year HR, was e v i s c e r a t e d. Not even close.

                    The issue of LASIK is silly. No one has ever argued against legitimate usage of medical technology (antibiotics, cure for polio, etc.). In fact, if a player has a legitimate reason, he can still get things like testosterone, medicine for ADD/ADHD, etc. But those issues are taking players with legitimate disabilities and leveling the playing field. Steroids were not used to level the playing field.

                    1. hansman

                      On top of steroids, baseball juiced the balls and got the umpires to shrink the zone.

                      It was a perfect storm of events that created 1994-2002. Not just steroids.

                  2. scorecardpaul

                    what makes you so sure that Maddux is so clean. I think he is smart enough to know what he could get away with.

            2. MichiganGoat

              Well what about Cobb sharpening his spikes and going feet up on any slide, you seem to believe that PED were the only serious version of players bending the rules to get an competitive edge. Every player everywhere has found was to push the limits to gain or maintain competitiveness. Baseball was just shy of sticking needles in players arms with how they passively supported and encouraged PED usage. As I’ve said anybody that wasn’t crazy excited and rooting for Mac/Sammy chasing 61 is a bold face lier. We loved that, baseball loved that, we turned these players into demi-gods! So of course every single player considered (and I think the majority) using PED. To punish people for something everyone encouraged and supported because of a false bullshit belief in “purity of the game” is a hypocritical game to make people feel better about themselves. I’m sick of this witch hunt put these players I’m the hall or banish an entire era from the record books. The fact that the all time home run leader, 600 HR players, and 3000 hit players are being shunned because of hearsay is the true crime in all this. This holy holy purity crap makes a mockery out if what the HOF should stand for. I’m just about ready to push to ban the HOF and treat it like a museum in Branson. Such incredible bullshit- that what baseball needs A HALL OF BULLSHIT.

              1. cub-hub

                Good for you.

                1. scorecardpaul

                  cub-hub, please improve your posts. spell check, or grammar check would be a start. I am having a very hard time with your posts. Please be more specific. How are we supposed to know who cheated, and who didn’t.
                  My point is this… They all cheated, good for them. put them all in the hof. If you don’t agree with this please tell us how we r supposed to know who cheated?

              2. jh03

                Exactly, Goat. The MLB was saved by these guys. The didn’t bat an eye when they were lining their pocket books, and the writers didn’t speak up when they had awesome stories to write about every night.

                Plus, the impact of PED’s is over-blown. Barry Bonds hit the shit out of baseballs. PED’s didn’t do that. They didn’t give him the ability to catch up to a 99mph heater, or to wait back and punish a curve. He had the unique skill, that a small percentage of athletes have, in order to make him great.

                1. cub-hub

                  If you don’t think steroids help awareness and instincts, things that help you hit a baseball better, then you don’t know much about steroids.

                  1. jh03

                    So if I took a lot of steroids I could become a major league baseball player?

                    1. Scotti

                      If you were right on the cusp, yes. And if you were already a good player, it could make you great. That’s the issue.

            3. hansman

              ” Him being a racist did not give him a competitive edge.”

              Sooo…you can treat your fellow humans like animals just because of their skin color but if they take steroids…(wags finger and gives a “mother” scowl)

              1. cub-hub

                I didn’t say that. This is strickly a competitive thing. The competition is what matters here. There is nothing wrong with gaining a competitive edge legally. Illegally doing it, and then lying about it is the problem. So even by those standards, why lie about it. Come clean and then lead the push to legalize steroids if Its no big deal. Don’t hide behind I didn’t do it.

                1. jh03

                  You’re over-stating the illegal factor of it. The MLB didn’t test. The MLB didn’t want them to stop using. It helped the game. Yeah, it was “against the rules,” but if the MLB didn’t enforce the rules how can you sit here, 15 years later, and do it? That doens’t make sense.

                  A guy getting caught cheating today is completely different than someone getting caught back then. Today there’s actually a system to stop it and the game is proactive in stopping it.

                  1. Scotti

                    MLB would have needed the Union to agree to PED testing. It took Congress to get the Union to move as far as it has (they still don’t test blood for HGH because the Union refuses). And taking steroids was not just against the rules, it was against the law.

                    1. jh03

                      So is taking other forms of drugs and those guys are still in the Hall.

                      My point isn’t that PED users are saints. It’s just that it doesn’t make sense to persecute them, and not others, and keep them out of the Hall.

                    2. Scotti

                      The difference is the severity. MLB (individual ballclubs, really) had always looked the other way when dudes were taking this, that or the other thing to perk up. Bulking up has skewed the numbers drastically. There is a literal quantitative difference.

                    3. jh03

                      Guys, we’re just going to go in circles. I respect your opinions, we’ll agree to disagree, and I’m bowing out of this convo.

                  2. mjhurdle

                    I would disagree with the idea that we can’t punish the players because MLB didn’t enforce the rules.

                    The players made a choice to cheat. It doesn’t matter if all their friends were doing it, or if MLB looked the other way at times, or they did it just to get money to feed starving orphans in Chile, or that the media loved them for it at the time.
                    All those things may be true, but it does not take away from the fact that players knowingly took substances that were prohibited. Anything else is just rationalizing or distracting from a position that cannot be defended against the current rules regarding entry into the HoF.
                    The HoF has integrity and sportsmanship clauses in the selection criteria. The fact that other cheaters made it in, or other unsavory players are already in, or that the same writers loved the players at the time are all true, but do not take away from the fact that a cheater is by definition violating the integrity and sportsmanship clause.

                    To me the issue is where you draw the line. I don’t like the idea of excluding someone because a friend of a friend of a friend thinks his back acne meant he took PEDs. But a proven cheater should not be in. And for this, the burden of proof is not the same level as a court of law.
                    I respect that everyone will have their own opinion on what a “proven cheater” is, but I don’t like the argument that “Steroids saved baseball (debatable)” or “Player X is in the Hall and he cheated/was a jerk/racist/didn’t like Almond Joys”. Those are arguments for changing the HoF entry criteria. Those are not arguments for letting cheaters in the Hall as it stands now.

          2. cub-hub

            Also, it appears more people agree with my “opinion” than yours. Well, at least the people that matter anyway. Thank God.

            1. Norm

              Yes, 60-70% of the BBWAA agree with your opinion.
              For now. Bonds and Clemens will get in eventually.

              1. cub-hub

                I doubt they will. They are losing support, not gaining. The sad part is that both these guys were legends and first ballot guys before they cheated. Why cheat? Its shows they have no respect for the game and no respect for their own legacies. So why should we respect their legacies. These people are scum and I can’t believe anyone who loves the game, respect legacies and has kids who they want to share this love of the sport and competition with would support these idiots. Its dispicable.

                1. jh03

                  But it’s okay to respect the legacy of the players if the league was full of racists? That’s pretty much what you said before, when saying, “I would rather have 1000 racist in baseball than 1 steroid user.”

                  I’d rather tell my kids about how awesome a PED user was and tell stories about him, than tell them about how awesome someone who beats their wife was. Or someone who hated his own teammates because of their skin color. Or someone who beats animals or their kids.

                  1. cub-hub

                    Beating wives, kids and animals are illegal. Hating someone because they are different is not illegal. Ty Cobb was a pathetic person. Ty Cobb being a racist did not help him withbaseball.

                    1. jh03

                      So you’d rather tell your kids about Ty Cobb than Roger Clemens?

                    2. cub-hub

                      I would rather tell my kids about Greg Maddux and guys like him. I would tell my kids that Ty Cobb and Roger Clemens are 2 idiots.

                    3. MichiganGoat

                      “Hating someone because they are different is not illegal”

                      ummmm YES IT IS! If your hate does them harm it becomes a crime. Or do all the discrimination cases not really a crime in your eyes?

                    4. cub-hub

                      MG, hating someone is not a crime. Nobody said anything about harming anyone. That a completely different point.

                    5. CubFan Paul

                      “MG, hating someone is not a crime”

                      Wrong. “Hate Crimes” have been written into law all across the country for idiots who don’t respect others.

                    6. mjhurdle

                      CubFanPaul,
                      Hating someone is not a crime. Acting on that hate is.
                      I hate Aaron Rodgers. I deeply hate him. I also hate Chris Carpenter.
                      I cant get arrested for that.

                    7. cub-hub

                      MJHurdle, I hate Almond Joy. I wonder how much time in the slammer I’ll get for that.

                    8. hansman

                      “CubFanPaul,
                      Hating someone is not a crime. Acting on that hate is.
                      I hate Aaron Rodgers. I deeply hate him. I also hate Chris Carpenter.
                      I cant get arrested for that.”

                      But hating Twix has you on the FBIs top-10 list.

                    9. MichiganGoat

                      Cub-hub hating to the point you discriminate and insult publicity is absolutely a crime. Ty Cobb would be guilty of many charges by today’s standards. To believe otherwise is ignorant and foolish and I hope you understand why we have these laws in place.

                    10. cub-hub

                      False MG. I can call a black person the N word, I can call a white person a cracker, a Mexican a wetback, a Muslim a terrorist, and I can ride it in public as hard as I want. That would make me an idiot. A racist. A lot of things. It won’t make me a criminal. If I don’t do any physical harm or single out a single specific person( which is against the law, but not criminally, only civilly), or suggest someone else does, which would be inciting a riot, then there is nothing that can be done criminally. I don’t know all the things Cobb did, so I can’t speak on him.

                    11. cub-hub

                      Even the civil part is only illegal if the person can prove Icaused them emotional pain or my comment cause them to lose ffinancially.

                    12. CubFan Paul

                      “I can call a black person the N word…It won’t make me a criminal”

                      That is a crime (I know it is for a fact in Indiana). Verbally abusing anyone is a crime, if the victim presses charges

                      Just like, not all domestic violence is physical, a lot of is just words that results prosecution.

                    13. Boogens

                      “So you’d rather tell your kids about Ty Cobb than Roger Clemens?”

                      JH03… isn’t this the same Roger Clemens that threw his wife under the bus to protect his own ass? You might want to use someone else to make your point.

                    14. cub-hub

                      Cubfan Paul, I highly doubt it. If that’s the case, I guess I could be arrested for calling stupid. Calling a person the N word is in no way illegal. Not in Indiana. Not anywhere. I have never seen a person arrested for verbal abuse. For making threats, yes. Verbally inciting a riot? Yes For calling his a wife a B among other things? No. I have seen people awarded money in divorce preceding, but not charged criminally.

                    15. CubFan Paul

                      So since cub-hub hasn’t seen it, it can’t be true.

                      That fact that your on that side of this argument makes you a dumbass or just super ignorant to the facts.

                      Have a nice day.

                    16. cub-hub

                      I’m not going to stoop to your level Cubfan Paul. However, if its a law, the go to Google, look it up and post it. I just tried and could not find it. All law in all states are accessible on line. Please show me.

                    17. jh03

                      “You might want to use someone else to make your point.”

                      Yeah… I know. I was too young to actually know what each of the players were like off the field, when they played.. and I just remembered hearing bad things about Bonds as a teammate, so I didn’t use him. Should have used someone else.

                    18. mjhurdle

                      What you are thinking of is a ‘Disturbing the peace’ charge. It has nothing to do with any specific words, or hate, or anything like that.
                      If you called someone a name walking past them, someone could try to charge you with DTP. It probably would not stick, but they could try.
                      Regardless, it has nothing to do with hating someone. It isn’t restricted to any specific words. You could get that charge even if you used no swear words or slurs.
                      Once again, the idea is that the government has absolutely no right to tell me who I like or don’t like.
                      However, if i decide to act on my hatred of a person or group of people, the government can then punish the action. It is my right to hate or love someone. It is not my right to harass or harm someone based on that same Hate/Love.

                2. Norm

                  Would you stop with this “respect the game” crap?
                  Is a player that is trying to fake out an ump by saying he caught the ball instead of trapping it “respecting the game”?
                  Is a catcher moving the ball after he catches to make it look more like a strike “respecting the game”?

                  Players do things like this all the time, but because they didn’t break a home run record, this is looked at as “gamesmanship” or some BS.

                  And you say “It does have rules against trying to gain a competitive advantage illegally.”
                  Not when Bonds and Clemens did what they did. And not when Hank Aaron and Bob Gibson did what they did.

                  If you want to hold Palmeiro or Manny Ramirez out, go ahead, because they failed a test after it was a rule.

                  1. cub-hub

                    Steroids were always illegal in baseball. There was no test, but it was still against the rules. It was also against the law. Baseball does not have the ability to overrule the law. So yes, it was illegal.

                  2. mjhurdle

                    “Not when Bonds and Clemens did what they did. And not when Hank Aaron and Bob Gibson did what they did.”

                    Maybe Aaron and Gibson get a pass, but the PED memo and regulations was sent out in 91 by Vincent, which made it against the rules. Testing had to be bargained through the Union, so that came later. But the were prohibited since 91.

            2. MichiganGoat

              And those people are hypocritical asshats.

            3. Voice of Reason

              Cub-hub:

              You sound like such a candy it’s not even funny.

              To say “Also, it appears more people agree with my “opinion” than yours. Well, at least the people that matter anyway. Thank God.”

              Really dude?

              1. cub-hub

                Voice of reason, you are the last person who needs to call anyone, anything. Get real.

  5. hansman

    Brett, comments are turned off on the Morning Bullets again.

  6. If Only Greg Maddux Had Stayed and Other Hall of Fame Bullets | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary

    […] the BBWAA released its Hall of Fame balloting, revealing that Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, and Frank Thomas had surpassed the 75% threshold in their […]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.