2018 Baseball Hall of Fame: In or Out?

Candidates for the Baseball Hall of Fame need 75% of voters from the Baseball Writers Association of America to support their candidacy to gain election. What would I do if I were a voter? Here's my take on eight candidates who are new to the ballot this year and eight who have been on the ballot in previous years but not yet made it in.

First time candidates:

Johnny Damon: He'll generate some discussion because he was able to accumulate 2,769 hits and scored 1,668 runs, and because he was a big part of the Yankees-Red Sox rivalry of the 2000s, playing on both sides. But the rest of the numbers just aren't there, and at no point was he an elite player. It was a memorable career, but not a Hall of Fame one.

Verdict: No

Andruw Jones: I really struggled with this one. I still do a double take every time I see that he hit 434 home runs; it doesn't seem like he was around long enough to do that. He was also an elite defender in center field for a long time, winning ten straight Gold Glove awards. But he wasn't a well-rounded hitter; the fact that he didn't reach 2,000 hits (1,933) is a big blow to his case. His career dropped off quickly after his elite ten-year stretch from 1998-2007; with one or two more great seasons, it'd be a lot easier to put him in. I'm going to have to say no, though should he get elected one day I won't take much issue with it.

Verdict: No

Chipper Jones: There's no doubt he should be in. He has the statistics and was a fixture of the Atlanta Braves teams that won 14 straight division titles. But a word of caution: Let's not get too caught up in the fact that he's "one of the greatest switch hitters of all time." Remember that players switch hit to give themselves an advantage and we shouldn't treat it like it's a handicap that a player has to overcome.

Verdict: Yes

Jamie Moyer: He's going to get some attention because he lasted 25 years in the majors and was able to pile up 269 wins. It's a career that warrants a lot of respect, and he did have some great seasons, but he's not a Hall of Famer.

Verdict: No

Scott Rolen: Third basemen have had a hard time gaining election, for whatever reason. Chipper Jones will get in, but there's also Rolen to consider. Rolen had some great seasons at the plate, but he didn't have the stretch of dominance you're usually expected to have to put together a Hall of Fame career. For a position with high offensive expectations, the overall numbers just aren't there: a .281 average, 2,077 hits, and 316 home runs is not Hall of Fame worthy. He was a great defensive player, but not a dominant one, and I don't think that tips the scales enough in his favor.

Verdict: No

Johan Santana: During his prime, he was arguably the game's best pitcher. But he doesn't have the longevity that warrants induction, only playing 12 seasons with just eight as a full-time starter. It's too bad that injuries derailed his career; he'd have made it if he'd lasted four more seasons.

Verdict: No

Jim Thome: A player with 612 home runs and 1,699 RBIs should be in with little debate. If he doesn't get in right away - aside from the steroid suspicion, which hasn't been proven - it's because he played in the most prolific offensive era in history and that some feel hitting a lot of home runs isn't the accomplishment it once was. But still, 612 home runs is a big deal. Hopefully this doesn't take long.

Verdict: Yes

Omar Vizquel: I feel like if we're going to include Ozzie Smith, then we have to include Vizquel. Smith was a once-in-a-lifetime defensive talent; Vizquel might not quite be on that level, but he's still among the best defensive shortstops of all time. Vizquel was also more of an offensive force than Smith was, finishing with 2,877 hits. It's hard to elect someone primarily on defense because it's so subjective, but given his longevity and the fact that he did contribute on offense, I'll give him the nod.

Verdict: Yes

Returning candidates:

Vladimir Guerrero: I don't remember ever seeing another player who had a more intimidating presence at the plate than Guerrero did. If the pitch was within two feet of the strike zone, he was probably going to swing and probably do some damage. The biggest question for his candidacy is whether he hung around long enough, as he was done at age 36 - not great for a position player - and failed to reach any of the milestones (449 home runs, 1,496 RBIs, 2,590 hits) that normally get you in automatically. But he was a dominant player for over a decade, which includes 11 consecutive years (1998-2008) of batting at least .300 with at least 25 home runs. And while he made a lot of errors in the field, he also threw out a lot of baserunners with his rocket of an arm. I'm going to go with my gut and say yes.

Verdict: Yes

Trevor Hoffman: He just missed last year and is going to get in, but I'm generally against electing relief pitchers. I just don't think they do enough to have a major impact on the game. Saves is a junk statistic; getting three outs before giving up three runs is something that every pitcher should be able to do at a high success rate, even if it is in the ninth inning. I'm willing to make an exception for Mariano Rivera because he was a key part of one of the all-time great dynasties and because of his postseason dominance. Whether it's fair or not, Hoffman didn't play on a lot of great teams and therefore doesn't have many key moments that defined his career like Rivera does. Since relief pitching is becoming more important in today's game, my opinion may someday change. But as of right now, being second all-time in saves is not enough to warrant induction.

Verdict: No

Jeff Kent: If he played almost any other position besides second base, he would not have lasted into what is now his sixth year on the ballot. But because he played a traditionally weak offensive position, some still think he should be in. 2,461 hits and 377 home runs is not quite enough unless you were also a great defender, and Kent did nothing to stand out in that regard. I'll admit that the 1,518 RBIs is impressive, but since his case is solely based on offense, I don't think he quite did enough.

Verdict: No

Fred McGriff: I like to compare McGriff's career to that of one of his contemporaries, Craig Biggio. Neither was an elite player, but while Biggio made the Hall of Fame easily, McGriff's chances don't look good. There are two big difference between their careers: First, Biggio reached one of the "automatic" milestones for election of 3,000 hits (he finished with 3,060), largely due to the fact that he played for 20 years, while McGriff just missed the magic mark of 500 home runs, finishing with 493. The second difference is that while Biggio played his entire career with the Houston Astros, McGriff played for six different teams and therefore is not a legend to any one fan base. It may not seem fair, but that's the way it is. Playing in the most prodigious offensive era the game has ever seen, McGriff just didn't do enough to distinguish himself from his peers.

Verdict: No

Edgar Martinez: This is a tough one. I have no problem letting designated hitters into the Hall of Fame; it's a position that somebody has to play, so we should be willing to recognize greatness. Plus, we've elected some hitters that weren't exactly great defenders. Martinez was a great hitter, but looking at his numbers, it's a tough case to make. He finished with 2,247 hits, 309 home runs, and 1,261 RBIs. None of those numbers stand out. His saving grace may be his ability to get on base. We live in an era in which we love walks, and Martinez earned 1,283 of them. Compare that to Vladimir Guerrero's 737 walks, and Martinez actually reached base more times than Guerrero did. Martinez is on the ballot this year for the tenth and final time, and he only reached 58% last year, so it's going to be an uphill climb. It feels like this vote will be a referendum on whether designated hitters should receive recognition, now and in the future. Reluctantly, I'll give my blessing, though I don't think it will be a travesty if he doesn't make it.

Verdict: Yes

Mike Mussina: I'm having a hard time understanding why Mussina isn't getting more votes. It's time for everyone to come to terms with the fact that we're not going to see another 300 game winner, at least in the foreseeable future; the game has just changed too much. Mussina's 270 wins are a tremendous accomplishment, even if we are valuing the win statistic less and less. Some will discredit that because he pitched for a lot of high-scoring teams, but when we look at his entire career, he was one of the game's most established pitchers for two decades. Hopefully he'll eventually make it.

Verdict: Yes

Curt Schilling: The elephant in the room is Schilling's political views; I hope the voters are not taking that into consideration, although I can't help but think that some of them are. All that aside, when we look at Schilling's regular season numbers, it could go either way: 216 wins and a 3.46 ERA. This is a case in which his postseason achievements may tip the scales in his favor. He was a key figure on two of the most important championship-winning teams of this past generation, the 2001 Diamondbacks and 2004 Red Sox. Taking that into consideration, I'd put him in.

Verdict: Yes

Larry Walker: He was a great hitter, and I don't hold it against him that he played many of his games at Coors Field, the most hitter-friendly park in the league. But I don't think the full body of work is there. He only played in more than 143 games one time in his career, playing in fewer than 2,000 games overall (1,988). Yes, the .313 batting average is impressive, and 383 home runs is nothing to sneeze at, but he needed more at-bats for his numbers to reach Hall of Fame level.

Verdict: No