Circle of Greats 1955 Balloting – Part 1

This post is for voting and discussion in the fifteenth round of balloting for the Circle of Greats. This round begins to add those players born in 1955. Rules and lists are after the jump.

As we did with players born in 1958, players born in 1955 will be brought on to the COG eligible list over two rounds — the top half of the alphabet this round and the bottom half of the alphabet next round. The idea is to assure that we achieve our quota of inductees, matching the number of players that the baseball writers have inducted into the Hall of Fame (currently 112), while also roughly matching the end points of the historical era from which the writers have largely chosen their inductees. As usual, the new group joins the holdovers from previous rounds to comprise the full group eligible to receive your votes this round. And, as usual, the new group of 1955-born players, in order to join the eligible list, must have played at least 10 seasons in the major leagues or generated at least 20 Wins Above Replacement (“WAR”, as calculated by baseball-reference.com, and for this purpose meaning 20 total WAR for everyday players and 20 pitching WAR for pitchers).

As always, each submitted ballot, if it is to be counted, must include three and only three eligible players. The one player who appears on the most ballots cast in the round is inducted into the Circle of Greats.  Players who fail to win induction but appear on half or more of the ballots that are cast win four added future rounds of ballot eligibility. Players who appear on 25% or more of the ballots cast, but less than 50%, earn two added future rounds of ballot eligibility. Any other player in the top 9 (including ties) in ballot appearances, or who appears on at least 10% of the ballots, wins one additional round of ballot eligibility.

All voting for this round closes at 11:00 PM EDT on Friday, April 19, while changes to previously cast ballots are allowed until 11:00 PM EDT Wednesday, April 17.

If you’d like to follow the vote tally, and/or check to make sure I’ve recorded your vote correctly, you can see my ballot-counting spreadsheet for this round here: 1955 Part 1 COG Vote Tally . I’ll be updating the spreadsheet periodically with the latest votes. Initially, there is a row in the spreadsheet for every voter who has cast a ballot in any of the past rounds, but new voters are entirely welcome — new voters will be added to the spreadsheet as their ballots are submitted. Also initially, there is a column for each of the holdover players; additional player columns from the new born-in-1955 group will be added to the spreadsheet as votes are cast for them.

Choose your three players from the lists below of eligible players. The 11 current holdovers are listed in order of the number of future rounds (including this one) through which they are assured eligibility, and alphabetically when the future eligibility number is the same. The new group of 1955 birth-year guys are listed below in order of the number of seasons each played in the majors, and alphabetically among players with the same number of seasons played. In total there were 32 players born in 1955 who met the “10 seasons played or 20 WAR” minimum requirement. 16 of those are being added to the eligible list this round (alphabetically from Floyd Bannister through Lee Mazzilli); the 16 players further down in the alphabet wil be added next round.

Holdovers:
Tom Glavine (eligibility guaranteed for 8 rounds)
Tony Gwynn (eligibility guaranteed for 8 rounds)
John Smoltz (eligibility guaranteed for 6 rounds)
Craig Biggio (eligibility guaranteed for 3 rounds)
Alan Trammell  (eligibility guaranteed for 3 rounds)
Lou Whitaker (eligibility guaranteed for 3 rounds)
Roberto Alomar (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Paul Molitor  (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Eddie Murray (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Ryne Sandberg (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Tim Raines (eligibility not guaranteed beyond this round)

Everyday Players (born in 1955, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Jack Clark
Chet Lemon
Mike Heath
Jeffrey Leonard
Lee Mazzilli
Bruce Benedict
Mickey Hatcher
Ruppert Jones

Pitchers (born in 1955, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Danny Darwin
Floyd Bannister
Jim Clancy
Greg Harris
Jay Howell
Ron Davis
Len Barker
Ernie Camacho

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

111 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
10 years ago

Well, I know two of my votes are going to Alan Trammell and Ryne Sandberg. My all-middle-infielder ballot of last round was broken up by Larkin’s election, and I had expected to vote for the same three again. So I’m left with a difficult problem. I’d like to give my third spot to Kevin Brown, but I can’t. Same for Edgar Martinez. And Kenny Lofton. So next on my personal list is Tom Glavine. And, again, as much as I’d like, as a lifelong Brewers fan, to vote for Paul Molitor, I just can’t do that when there are at… Read more »

Chris C
Chris C
10 years ago

Biggio, Raines, Murray

ATarwerdi96
ATarwerdi96
10 years ago

Paul Molitor, Tony Gwynn, Tom Glavine

qx
qx
10 years ago

Tom Glavine, Lou Whitaker, Craig Biggio

wx
wx
10 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

Keep it under wx. I did this vote from a different device that the old name was still on. Sorry about that!

T-Bone
T-Bone
10 years ago

Raines
Sandberg
And one of the sparks of the 1988 Dodgers – Mickey Hatcher.

David Horwich
David Horwich
10 years ago

I feel almost bereft – I voted for Larkin every year he was on the ballot – who am I supposed to vote for now?!

Well, there’s no lack of good choices. Let’s try these:

Alomar, Glavine, Raines

J.R. Lebert
J.R. Lebert
10 years ago

As much as I want to vote for my mother’s favorite player, The Italian Stallion, Lee Mazzilli… no.

Raines, Biggio, Murray. I am not entirely convinced Molitor was clean when he had his huge 1996 campaign.

Hartvig
Hartvig
10 years ago

Three newcomers to the ballot I’ve always thought were underrated- Clark, Lemon & Heath. I’ll leave it to someone who saw him play more than I did to tell Clark’s story but I can comment first hand on the other 2. I’m probably a guilty as anyone for not fully appreciating Chet Lemon. I actually got to see him play both when he was with the White Sox and more often with the Tigers. I alway thought he was a good centerfielder and decent hitter but eventually it became apparent he had some of the worst base running instincts of… Read more »

Hartvig
Hartvig
10 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

Now that I see my post I realize I forgot to comment on Mike Heath. Depending on where I’m sitting at a game I usually try to concentrate on what the catcher or the middle infielders are doing leading up to the pitch. Of the Tiger catchers I’ve seen in person- which would include Parrish, Nokes, Tettleton, Inge, Rodriguez and Avila plus maybe a couple of lesser lights- I felt that he controlled the tempo and flow of the game more than any but Brad Ausmus. I’m not saying that he was necessarily a better defensive catcher than all of… Read more »

Ed
Ed
10 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

Lemon was definitely underappreciated. Since 1960, he’s 17th in outfielder Rfield, yet never won a Gold Glove. The only outfielder in the period to have more Rfield and also never win a Gold Glove was Brian Jordan. Lemon was also platooned a little. At least from what I can tell. He had 9 seasons of 141-150 games played but none above 150. Only 66% of his career PAs came against righties which strikes me as quite low. Oddly, it’s not like he was terrible against righties…his career OPS against them was .766. My guess is that Lemon was mostly sat… Read more »

brp
brp
10 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

Clark, Lemon and Heath – two candy bars and a fruit. I’m not sure why we’re splitting this round, none of these newcomers make me even stop and think.

Molitor (feel like I better vote for him once after leaving him off and him losing by 1 vote last round)
Sandberg
Glavine

mosc
mosc
10 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

I still want a 1969 round…

So what if Mo’s not retired yet. You think there’s really a chance that even if he puts up the worst season in the history of relief pitching in 2013 we’re not going to vote him in? For that matter, there’s no guarantee the rocket doesn’t try pitching again and already break the retirement age starting line to this thing.

Dalton Mack
Editor
10 years ago

Glavine, Smoltz and Whitaker.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago

Danny Darwin – 21 seasons for 8 franchises. Zero postseason appearances.

He also appeared as both starter and reliever in 16 of those 21 seasons.

Age 37 – 5.7 WAR
Age 38 – 6.30 era
Age 39 – 7.45 era
Age 40 – 6th in WHIP

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago

Glavine
Gwynn
Darwin

Chris
Chris
10 years ago

Glavine Gwynn Smoltz

latefortheparty
latefortheparty
10 years ago

Tom Glavine
Lou Whitaker
Tim Raines

RonG
RonG
10 years ago

Trammell, Whitaker, Murray

Andy
Andy
10 years ago

Gwynn
Glavine
Raines

Jeff Harris
Jeff Harris
10 years ago

Raines
Whitaker
Trammell

Nick Pain
Nick Pain
10 years ago

I completely missed the last ballot, I guess I was too excited by the prospect of Opening Day that weekend. Oh well, such is life. My vote for this group is:

Gwynn, Whitaker, and Glavine.

Bryan O'Connor
Editor
10 years ago

Career Wins Above Average, excluding negative seasons:

Trammell 45.1
Whitaker 43.1
Glavine 42.2
Molitor 40.7
Smoltz 40.2
Sandberg 39.1
Alomar 37.3
Raines 37.2
Gwynn 36.8
Biggio 36.7
Murray 34.9
Lemon 33.2
Clark 26.7

Interesting how close Lemon is to Murray and others by this method.

Brown. Edgar. Trammell. Whitaker. Smoltz.

The Diamond King
10 years ago

Murray, Gwynn, Raines

Mo
Mo
10 years ago

Raines Trammel Whitaker

Gary Bateman
Gary Bateman
10 years ago

Molitor, Murray, Gwynn

Dr. Remulak
Dr. Remulak
10 years ago

Smoltz, Gwynn, Raines

--bill
--bill
10 years ago

Tom Glavine
Eddie Murray
Paul Molitor

Abbott
Abbott
10 years ago

Raines, Glavine, Biggio

Nadig
Nadig
10 years ago

Gwynn, Glavine, Molitor.

Jawes
Jawes
10 years ago

Voting strategies and agendas differ from round to round, which is fine. Last round everyone was hot for Molitor early, but the support waned. This round he’s getting little support early, and it looks like some folks might be ready to put Glavine in.

My spreadsheet has the top 3 as Glavine, Whitaker, and Trammell, so they will get the nod for my vote.

GrandyMan
GrandyMan
10 years ago

Glavine and Whitaker are my top two guys by Actual Value, and Raines is too good to fall off as far as I’m concerned.

My initial ballot for this round: Glavine, Whitaker, Raines.

GrandyMan
GrandyMan
10 years ago
Reply to  GrandyMan

birtelcom,

Please swap out Raines for Molitor. Raines is getting way more support than I envisioned.

Thanks,

GM

Shping
Shping
10 years ago
Reply to  GrandyMan

I’d love to see another vote for Molitor, but is changing votes allowed? Doesn’t seem like it should be. Opens the door for all kinds of issues.

Shping
Shping
10 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

Makes sense. Thanks and sorry if i missed the earlier memo.

Lawrence Azrin
Lawrence Azrin
10 years ago

Sing the song of Strategic Voting: – Tim Raines – Ryan Sandberg – Roberto Alomar (I’ve been voting for him since COG year-one) I’d like to vote for Murray, Molitor also, but I assume they’ll get enough votes to to get at least another year of eligibility. How did Larkin get voted in last round with 32 votes, while Alomar gets only ONE vote? They’re about as similar as two COG candidates can be: – both middle infielders – both had an identical career OPS+ of 116 – almost identical OBA/SLG of .371 and .443/.444 – AS and MVP totals… Read more »

Bryan O'Connor
Editor
10 years ago
Reply to  Lawrence Azrin

Great point, LA. I’ve been voting for Larkin and not Alomar, but I agree that they’re not all that different. Larkin had a 10-point edge in WAA, which speaks to the positional adjustment and B-R’s assessment of their fielding. Larkin had 18 Rfield and 119 Rpos, to Alomar’s -38 and 56, a difference of about 11 wins. Could Alomar have been just as valuable as Larkin if he stood 20 feet further to his right for his whole career? B-R doesn’t seem to think so, but it’s possible. I think the 32-1 voting disparity has little to do with their… Read more »

RJ
RJ
10 years ago
Reply to  Bryan O'Connor

I agree, it was a lot to do with electability. Looking at the eight elections between the first and last they shared together, in five of them the vote was either tied or separated by just one vote and in another they were separated by three votes, so there was clearly a similar level of base support. But in the more open years, like the Schilling and Walker wins, Larkin pulled away. I suspect last year there may have been a desire to see a middle infielder elected and, based on previous voting patterns, Larkin had the best shot at… Read more »

Lawrence Azrin
Lawrence Azrin
10 years ago
Reply to  Bryan O'Connor

Bryan and RJ (#34, #37) – I agree with everything you stated, with one exception. I just can’t accept that Alomar was a below-average second baseman, or even average. I saw him his whole career, and he was one of the best defensive 2nd basemen I ever saw. He was, at minimum, above-average defensively. Maybe his range wasn’t quite as good as a lot of people thought, maybe his arm wasn’t as strong. I dunno. Now, I understand that some flashy “Web Gem” plays shown repeatedly on ESPN can unduly influence a lot of people’s opinions, but the consensus that… Read more »

mosc
mosc
10 years ago
Reply to  Lawrence Azrin

Yeah, before your post I would have said the other 4 are a wash but I don’t like Alomar as much. Thanks for making it a 5-way tossup again.

mosc
mosc
10 years ago
Reply to  Lawrence Azrin

Ok, so here’s my attempt 1) Speed is undervalued. That means I’m going to add some value based on SB’s and success rate. 2) DWAR is stupid. To me that means the positive and negative WAR adjustments for two players that share the same position are too large. They should be reduced. The positional adjustment on all these guys is substantial. In other words, I think the replacement level (defensively) middle infielders get a boost in WAR. Of the 5, Trammel and Whitaker were clearly less of a threat around the basepaths. Biggio and Alomar had real speed and stole… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  mosc

mosc, I’m with you on every point.
And I trust consensus perception w/r/t defense more than the stats.
Are there any Astro fans out there who can weigh in on Biggio’s D?

RJ
RJ
10 years ago
Reply to  mosc

@71 Voomo: Without commenting on the specifics of this argument as it relates to these players, isn’t it true that a large reason we have defensive stats is because the consensus perception is not reliable? Without defensive statistics, would we not still think that Derek Jeter was a fantastic defensive shortstop?

I’m not saying the modern metrics are infallible, but if they challenge our assumptions then it should at least give us pause to think.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  mosc

I agree, RJ, in theory.
It is uncomfortable, though, to buy into stats that run counter to gut feelings. Especially when the stats are complicated beyond the understanding of those of us with average intelligence.

I’d just love to hear from an Astro fan, partially as a test to see if they exist.

mosc
mosc
10 years ago
Reply to  mosc

Jeter’s DWAR is one of the main reasons I have a problem with the current system. He plays short. You can say he plays short poorly if you want. You can say he’s worse than average. I still think that -8 DWAR is insane. First off, Jeter was an above average shortstop when he was younger. His throwing arm is excellent and his .976 fielding percentage is at worst “excellent” for a career SS number. I agree his range is limited, particularly as he aged. However the idea that his defensive contribution to the team is less than that of… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  mosc

17 seasons
150 games / 2 = 75

17×75=
1,275 hits

mosc
mosc
10 years ago
Reply to  mosc

To argue that he didn’t get to a ball every other game that your average shortstop would, you’d have to show an equal proportionately larger number of balls to lf/cf during those years. Those attempts have to go somewhere. Bernie Williams is considered a poor range center fielder too. Where are all these balls magically falling in?

no statistician but
no statistician but
10 years ago
Reply to  mosc

This is for mosc: Those hits aren’t falling in at least partly because Jeter and Williams have had the good sense to play on teams with superior pitching. This doesn’t mean striking out every batter, but it does mean something advanced metrics doesn’t seem to want to handle, that good pitching makes those fly balls a little lazier, those line drives a little slower, those hot grounders a little cooler, and all more often within the range of SOMEBODY out there, maybe not the the SS or CF. Plus, as Bill James suggests someplace, I think in commenting on Nap… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
10 years ago
Reply to  mosc

birtelcom: Your last paragraph made me take a look at BAbip a lot more closely than I ever did, and I’m still looking. At this point, I don’t think I can quite agree with you premise, though, at least not in the sweeping version as stated. Just one quibble to point out my distrust: J.P. Howell, cited as having the same BAbip as Roy Halliday, actually has a Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde kind of career, being pretty God-awful in this stat as a limited starter (.295, .361, .379) and much better as a reliever (.251, .260, .291, .254). Well,… Read more »

BryanM
BryanM
10 years ago
Reply to  mosc

For what it’s worth, I have been lurking on this exchange with great interest , but nothing to say until Birtelcom @ 102 pushed me over the edge. My gut feelings are almost completely aligned with Mosc, with one exception. I too think speed is undervalued and tend to give an edge to speed guys if they are similar in value to other players. I too think that DWAR is a mess, but for different reasons; I think that the various advanced stats that are trying to go beyond range factor are really telling us something , at least over… Read more »

Bryan O'Connor
Editor
10 years ago
Reply to  mosc

In response to all the FIP vs. RA9 stuff above, here’s a fairly comprehensive, even-handed look at the evolution of DIPS theory:

http://sabr.org/research/many-flavors-dips-history-and-overview

Mike HBC
Mike HBC
10 years ago

Glavine, Molitor, Gwynn.

Doug
Editor
10 years ago

Whitaker, Molitor, Raines

Brent
Brent
10 years ago

With apologies to Len Barker for an imperfect ballot, Whitaker, Trammell, and Alomar

mosc
mosc
10 years ago

Well, I’m struggling with my vote on this one so I’m just going with who I think the three best players on the ballot are Molitor Gwynn Smoltz I could just as easily vote for Glavine, Raines, or Murray. But my real issue is now that Larkin’s in, I don’t have a clear reason to vote against all these middle infielders. Previously, I would just say “Larkin’s better than all these guys” so if I voted for Larkin, I didn’t need to consider Trammel v Smoltz or somesuch. Now I’m going to have to select a player from the Trammel/Whitaker/Sandberg/Biggio/Alomar… Read more »

mosc
mosc
10 years ago
Reply to  mosc

And I’d change my vote to keep rock on the ballot if I had to.

ProfessorLarry
ProfessorLarry
10 years ago

Raines, Whitaker, Trammell

defgav
defgav
10 years ago

Gwynn, Molitor, Murray

Kirk
Kirk
10 years ago

Raines Alomar Smoltz

Interesting that almost all the votes seem to be going to the hold overs. Can’t help but think then there would be a completely different COG if the voting had started from 1900 forward.

John Z
John Z
10 years ago

Why, you did not make this easy for me did you? I think it was Old Blue Eye’s; Frank Sinatra that sang “I’ll do it my Way” and choose from only those veterans born in 1955, still holding out and not voting for those hold overs. I have never put much stock into a stat that has evolved over the last several decades and is still evolving today (WAR), I prefer counting stats, but for this ballot I am going to have to swallow my pride and go with who has the best ?WAR? !!! Without futher adieu, my ballot… Read more »

Vinny
Vinny
10 years ago

Glavine, Alomar, Sandberg

BryanM
BryanM
10 years ago

Disappointed to see Molitor nosed out last time, but can’t really argue with the worthy winner , Larkin. This time I will go with Molitor, Trammell ,Whitaker,

Insert Name Here
Insert Name Here
10 years ago

Well, as this is a small ballot, I only count two worthy HOFers among the newcomers (two very underrated players: Chet Lemon and Jack Clark). Neither makes my ballot. Initial vote for 3 players (all holdovers): 1. Alan Trammell (6.4 WAR/162 during 11-yr peak of 1980-90) 2. Lou Whitaker (5.6 WAR/162 during 12-yr peak of 1982-93) 3. Ryne Sandberg (6.7 WAR/162 during 5-yr peak of 1988-92) — I could just have easily voted for Biggio, although Sandberg clearly holds the tiebreaker win over Raines. How I ended up sorting out the ranking of Sandberg, Biggio, Murray, Raines through tiebreakers would… Read more »

jeff b
jeff b
10 years ago

Molitor Smoltz and raines, missed last vote needed to make sure I got my vote out for raines, he definitely deserves it

PP
PP
10 years ago

What have you done for me lately? Molitor currently ranks 6th in the voting. And surprised to see him still on the ballot.

Mike L
Mike L
10 years ago

Molitor, Trammell, and, in a complete deviation from any of my prior votes, Glavine. I would just note that beyond the 305 wins, there was a ten year period in which Glavine finished two CY, finished second twice, and third twice. During that period, 1991-2000, he pitched over 2000 innings, won 20 five times and 186 in all despite losing time to the strikes in 1994 and 1995. Glavine never had the eye=popping dominance of some of the other top tier starters, because he was never a power pitcher, but applying an admittedly non-sabremetric standard of trying to put myself… Read more »

Shping
Shping
10 years ago

Molitor, Murray, Gwynn.

Jeff Hill
Jeff Hill
10 years ago

Gwynn, Glavine, Raines

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
10 years ago

Whitaker, Trammell, Raines

aweb
aweb
10 years ago

Molitor, Glavine, Trammell

Slash
Slash
10 years ago

Glavine, Sandberg, Biggio

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
10 years ago

Gwynn, Molitor, Murray

PP
PP
10 years ago

Molitor, Glavine, Sandberg