Tuesday Discussion: The Hall Vote

December 9, 2025

***

This week we asked our writers for their reactions on the recent Hall of Fame vote.

Here are their responses...

***

Paul Semendinger - It does sometimes seem like these committees pick the worst available candidates. Jeff Kent? Really?

You know who had more WAR than Jeff Kent?

Bonds.

Bobby Bonds.

All I can say to that is this should open the door for Bobby Grich, Lou Whitaker, and Willie Randolph who all had more WAR than Jeff Kent.

Maybe this also helps Graig Nettles. He is the all-time home run leader among American league third basemen... or was. Kent's home runs at second base seemed to be a factor for him.

By JAWS, they elected the 22nd greatest second baseman in history. The two players immediately above Kent: Ian Kinsler and Dustin Pedroia. Maybe they'll also get in. Chase Utley as well. The player immediately behind Kent in JAWS - Marcus Semien. I guess the Mets just got themselves a future Hall of Famer.

Nothing about Kent says "Hall of Fame" to me.

***

Mike Whiteman - I certainly wasn't happy with the Hall of Fame voting. I was really hoping that two of my favorite 1980s players - Don Mattingly and Dale Murphy - would be elected. They were not, and what was even more disappointing is that they weren't even close. 

This felt like the best chance for both players, and unfortunately it's obvious that Cooperstown doesn't seem realistic for either. 

***

Lincoln Mitchell - The Hall of Fame is a great museum. I have been there a few times and look forward to my next visit. The exhibitions are excellent and even lifetime students of the game’s history can learn more from going to the Hall of Fame. Cooperstown is a beautiful and fun upstate New York town, although the winter can be a bit chilly for this recovering Californian. There are good places to eat, the scenery is beautiful and great places to buy baseball memorabilia and baseball books. However, membership in the Hall of Fame has become absurd. The selection process for choosing contemporary era, and other special categories, is the kind of limited electorate process one would expect from the Soviet politburo. Therefore, in some sense, I don’t really care that somebody as clearly undeserving as Jeff Kent got inducted, but in some sense I do. Jeff Kent was good player who had two particularly great years, but even if we eliminate the PED guys, there were several more deserving and better players on that ballot. Moreover, there are several second basemen, notably Bobby Grich and Lou Whitaker, who were about half a generation older than Kent who are much more deserving of the honor.

***

Tim Kabel - I wouldn’t say that I was unhappy with the results of the Hall of Fame voting. As much as I liked, Don Mattingly, as a player, I don’t think he has the statistics to justify election to the Hall of Fame. That is primarily due to the injury that derailed his career.

On the other hand, I would not have a problem if Mattingly did get in. Nor would I have a problem if Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens were admitted to the Hall of Fame. Jeff Kent does not scream Hall of Famer for me, but I am not dead set against his election either.

***

Ed Botti - I wasn’t surprised, let’s put it that way. I do think Mattingly should be elected, especially when you look at his stats next to Kirby Puckett’s stats (Kirby was a first ballot HOF’er).

As far as the other players go, I have been saying for years Jeff Kent should be in the hall of fame, and would have already been had he been more approachable with the Media. They simply did not like each other, for those of you that were not around during his playing career. Some in the media hold grudges and form resentments, and Kent having to wait this long, despite the numbers he put up, proves it.

The other players are either stained by Bud Selig’s steroid era (Bonds, Clemens, and Sheffield), or IMO were great players, just not hall of famer players (Delgado, Murphy, Valenzuela).

I’d love to see the “Hit Man” make it, but at this point what else can he do? He is not the first and won’t be the last of deserving players that don’t get elected.

I’d rather have my number retired and a plaque in monument park then win the media popularity contest, anyway.

It’s shame that Mattingly’s consideration had to even go to the Contemporary Baseball Era Committee Ballot to start with.

***

Cary Greene - Count me as not being a fan of the Baseball Hall of Fame's decision making processes. I see nothing wrong with admitting known cheaters to the Hall of Fame -- provided they are marked with an Asterisk and their plaques are kept in an area of the facility designated for cheaters who had grand careers. Enshrining Bonds and Manny Ramirez and whomever else along with Shoeless Joe Jackson and Pete Rose should have happened long ago and what does it matter anyways?  I don't really have a strong opinion on this subject, but one thing I especially don't like is hypocrisy. 

Admittedly, the Hall of Fame has decided numerous times to overlook players who were known cheaters or poor sports and they chose to induct these players into their hallowed halls anyways, so if the Hall of Fame sees nothing wrong with all of the double standards they've created over the years, then let them. It's their museum right? I'm not sure what message the Hall of Fame is sending to its patrons?

The Hall of Fame's true purpose is to honor the game's best players, but in doing so, the Hall of Fame becomes a place where parents take their kids - in order to expose them to baseball history. In this respect, double standards only serve to confuse people. Imagine trying to answer your kid's innocent minded question, "Hey pop, why is Ty Cobb in the Hall of Fame but Pete Rose isn't?" 

I've often asked myself, is Gerrit Cole a future Hall of Famer? (Even though he and numerous other pitchers used Spider Tack to help them grip baseballs and subsequently improve their spin rates?) And I've wondered, "Should Graig Nettles really be inducted into the Hall of Fame despite him and many others being known users of corked bats?"

Looking at some of the Hall of Fame's greatest players raises even more questions. Should Whitey Ford be thrown out of the Hall of Fame bcause he scuffed and cut balls, or applied dirt, mud and spit to them, or because he sometimes moved off the rubber and towards the rubber before launching his pitches?

History tends to sweep many ugly tidbits under the carpet when narratives of the famous are written. It's a terrible thing that all the cheating happened throughout the history of baseball -- but human beings are easily corruptible and we are imperfect beings. Perhaps Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker should both be removed from the Hall of Fame because he gambled on baseball and fixed games with Tris Speaker, leading to both player's abrupt retirements? Then Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis later exonerated both players? 

My take is that it's up to MLB to police the sport and it's no secret that MLB was very late to adopt PED testing. Therefore, PED cheating happened in an environment that permitted it. It took the gravity of the Mitchell Report to determine that since baseball players are role models, PED use shouldn't be tolerated. Yet, PED use marred an entire era, easily spanning a decade or more.

Cheating, in all of its ugly forms, has created a giant, unsolvable problem for the Hall of Fame but one thing is fairly certain, the Hall of Fame's double standards are quite ridiculous. Admitting this year's lone inductee - Jeff Kent, while snubbing Barry Bonds yet again is pretty silly and how do we know that Kent didn't use a different designer PED that was undetectable at the time? Kent protected Bonds in the lineup for six straight seasons. I have a hard time believing that Kent never used PED's - it's far more likely that he just never got caught red handed. Honestly, why does it even matter? Baseball is now testing for PED's and trying hard to crack down on all other forms of known cheating. 

***