Committee Chairman
Kirk Buchner, "The Committee Chairman", is the owner and operator of the site. Kirk can be contacted at [email protected] .
Notinhalloffame.com wants your input!
Jan 01, 2016
Published in
Not in Hall of Fame News
Gang, this is the time where we ask your help!
As you know, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame has made their announcement as to who has made their Hall of Fame for the Class of 2016. This will necessitate a change in our ranking and through the years, you have let us know what you thought with your comments and votes, with those who are on the rock list.
You have also let us know on our “Rock and Roll Futures” with a comment or two, but now the next batch of futures will be placed on the list.
We would like to hear where you would consider ranking the following:
Alanis Morissette
Bikini Kill
Boyz II Men
Crash Test Dummies
Cypress Hill
Helmet
Kyuss
Live
Marc Anthony
Mercury Rev
Naughty by Nature
Pearl Jam
PM Dawn
Ricky Martin
Seal
The Cranberries
The Prodigy
Tori Amos
Tupac Shakur
Many thanks to all of you have told us your thoughts and have voted on the rock and other lists that we have.
We intend to have the new Rock list up as soon as we can!
As you know, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame has made their announcement as to who has made their Hall of Fame for the Class of 2016. This will necessitate a change in our ranking and through the years, you have let us know what you thought with your comments and votes, with those who are on the rock list.
You have also let us know on our “Rock and Roll Futures” with a comment or two, but now the next batch of futures will be placed on the list.
We would like to hear where you would consider ranking the following:
Alanis Morissette
Bikini Kill
Boyz II Men
Crash Test Dummies
Cypress Hill
Helmet
Kyuss
Live
Marc Anthony
Mercury Rev
Naughty by Nature
Pearl Jam
PM Dawn
Ricky Martin
Seal
The Cranberries
The Prodigy
Tori Amos
Tupac Shakur
Many thanks to all of you have told us your thoughts and have voted on the rock and other lists that we have.
We intend to have the new Rock list up as soon as we can!
2016 HOF Debate: Billy Wagner
Jan 01, 2016
Published in
Hall of Fame Debates
Last year, we did our first ever debate on Notinhalloffame.com where we tackled the Hall of Fame merit of twenty-four men who are on the Hall of Fame ballot, in what was in our opinion the most loaded ballot in our lifetime.
Since it was so much fun last time, we thought we would do it again!
One thing that has not changed is the number. We will again debate twenty-four men who are on the ballot.
What has changed are the ones debating. Last year I had the pleasure of having DDT, the curator of DDT’s Pop Flies blog and D.K. of the Phillies Archivist blog. This year, Spheniscus, who has participated in past Rock and Roll discussions, will be joining me.
Chairman: Like me you probably noticed that he isn’t getting a lot of press for debuting on the ballot. It makes sense I suppose, as entering with Trevor Hoffman puts him in the shadow, but is this is a shadow he should really be in?
While he is well behind in Saves (601 to 422), there are a lot of stats where Wagner comes out ahead. He has superior ERA (2.31 to 2.87), WHIP (0.998 to 1.058), SO/W (3.99 to 3.69) numbers and they have exactly the same JAWS of 24.0.
What people don’t mention about Wagner (maybe because they don’t mention him at all) is just how much he stunk in the playoffs. In 8 playoff series, Wagner pitched 11.2 Innings with a 10.03 ERA and a 1.971 WHIP. Hoffman hasn’t been a playoff stud either, but this is so atrocious to me that it counters so much of what he did in the regular season in my eyes. Honestly, I think Wagner is going to struggle just to get 2.5 percent of the vote, and I don’t think that is a wrong tally for him at all.
Spheniscus: Wagner was a better player than Hoffman. There, I said it. I also proved it in Hoffman’s section. He is a better player than Lee Smith. Also proved in Hoffman’s section. He also has the misfortune of being a bit of a jerk who couldn’t get it done in the postseason in the biggest stage of all, New York, and of never having held the saves record.
If Wagner had played in Kansas City, who was so down for most of his career, we would think of him entirely differently. A great player toiling away for terrible teams always pulls at the heartstrings a little more and changes the writer’s perception. And even though his save numbers would undoubtedly been lower due to fewer opportunities, his vote tally for this Hall would be higher. As it is, 10 years from now, he’ll be buying a ticket to see Hoffman’s plaque. I think 1% is about where he will fall.
Chairman: I think his biggest misfortune is debuting on the same ballot as Hoffman. I have no problem agreeing with you that I would rather have Wagner than Hoffman in the regular season (and hope to God I don’t need either one of them in the post-season because my team has a two digit lead going into the ninth). I am trying to think in this crowded ballot who is going to pick them both? The sad thing is I have read countless articles about Hoffman’s credentials. Hell, I got blasted via email when he debuted in the 40’s on our list and not in the top ten!
Basically, what I am saying is that I don’t see anybody picking Wagner over Hoffman (expect maybe us), and frankly, I don’t know that I would pick either.
Spheniscus: I said at the beginning I have 15 guys on this list I would vote into the Hall. None of them are closers. Wagner is first on my list of the three. Hoffman is first on the list of most people. He has no real friends in the media. There is no buzz. There is no way he is getting in. I just want it recorded somewhere in this process that he was the best at his position on that ballot. And that and $23 will get him a ticket to watch the Hall of Fame induction this summer.
Chairman: I will finish this one up short and sweet. Wagner would not get my vote this year, and I suspect not very many others either. Frankly, I think if he gets 2% it is a win for him, which is where I expect him to fall.
Spheniscus: I said he’d struggle to get 2.5%, 2% is probably closer. But I’ll take the under. He will get 1.8% of the vote. More than 25% lower than Hoffman and 15% lower than Smith. All because he never held a record that absolutely no one cares about. Which is insane, but the way of the world.
Since it was so much fun last time, we thought we would do it again!
One thing that has not changed is the number. We will again debate twenty-four men who are on the ballot.
What has changed are the ones debating. Last year I had the pleasure of having DDT, the curator of DDT’s Pop Flies blog and D.K. of the Phillies Archivist blog. This year, Spheniscus, who has participated in past Rock and Roll discussions, will be joining me.
Chairman: Like me you probably noticed that he isn’t getting a lot of press for debuting on the ballot. It makes sense I suppose, as entering with Trevor Hoffman puts him in the shadow, but is this is a shadow he should really be in?
While he is well behind in Saves (601 to 422), there are a lot of stats where Wagner comes out ahead. He has superior ERA (2.31 to 2.87), WHIP (0.998 to 1.058), SO/W (3.99 to 3.69) numbers and they have exactly the same JAWS of 24.0.
What people don’t mention about Wagner (maybe because they don’t mention him at all) is just how much he stunk in the playoffs. In 8 playoff series, Wagner pitched 11.2 Innings with a 10.03 ERA and a 1.971 WHIP. Hoffman hasn’t been a playoff stud either, but this is so atrocious to me that it counters so much of what he did in the regular season in my eyes. Honestly, I think Wagner is going to struggle just to get 2.5 percent of the vote, and I don’t think that is a wrong tally for him at all.
Spheniscus: Wagner was a better player than Hoffman. There, I said it. I also proved it in Hoffman’s section. He is a better player than Lee Smith. Also proved in Hoffman’s section. He also has the misfortune of being a bit of a jerk who couldn’t get it done in the postseason in the biggest stage of all, New York, and of never having held the saves record.
If Wagner had played in Kansas City, who was so down for most of his career, we would think of him entirely differently. A great player toiling away for terrible teams always pulls at the heartstrings a little more and changes the writer’s perception. And even though his save numbers would undoubtedly been lower due to fewer opportunities, his vote tally for this Hall would be higher. As it is, 10 years from now, he’ll be buying a ticket to see Hoffman’s plaque. I think 1% is about where he will fall.
Chairman: I think his biggest misfortune is debuting on the same ballot as Hoffman. I have no problem agreeing with you that I would rather have Wagner than Hoffman in the regular season (and hope to God I don’t need either one of them in the post-season because my team has a two digit lead going into the ninth). I am trying to think in this crowded ballot who is going to pick them both? The sad thing is I have read countless articles about Hoffman’s credentials. Hell, I got blasted via email when he debuted in the 40’s on our list and not in the top ten!
Basically, what I am saying is that I don’t see anybody picking Wagner over Hoffman (expect maybe us), and frankly, I don’t know that I would pick either.
Spheniscus: I said at the beginning I have 15 guys on this list I would vote into the Hall. None of them are closers. Wagner is first on my list of the three. Hoffman is first on the list of most people. He has no real friends in the media. There is no buzz. There is no way he is getting in. I just want it recorded somewhere in this process that he was the best at his position on that ballot. And that and $23 will get him a ticket to watch the Hall of Fame induction this summer.
Chairman: I will finish this one up short and sweet. Wagner would not get my vote this year, and I suspect not very many others either. Frankly, I think if he gets 2% it is a win for him, which is where I expect him to fall.
Spheniscus: I said he’d struggle to get 2.5%, 2% is probably closer. But I’ll take the under. He will get 1.8% of the vote. More than 25% lower than Hoffman and 15% lower than Smith. All because he never held a record that absolutely no one cares about. Which is insane, but the way of the world.
RIP: Doug Atkins
Dec 31, 2015
Published in
Not in Hall of Fame News
It is another sad day in the world of sports as Pro Football Hall of Famer, Doug Atkins died at the age of 85.
Atkins, a product of the University of Tennessee, was a freak of nature for his time. Standing at six foot eight and weighing 280 pounds, Atkins was a physical specimen the likes of which the National Football League had never seen, at least not someone who possessed as much skill as he did.
Drafted eleventh overall by the Cleveland Browns in 1953, the Defensive End would be traded to the Chicago Bears and would emerge as a star for the “Monsters of the Midway”. In Chicago, Atkins would help the Bears win the 1961 NFL Championship and would go to eight Pro Bowls and made a First Team All Pro.
At the age of 37, Atkins would finish his career with the expansion New Orleans Saints, and would have his number retired by the team due to the high regard he was held in.
To put in perspective the type of player that Atkins was, he was a player who both Johnny Unitas and Dick Butkus said they were afraid of. Butkus was afraid of him? Damn!
While Sacks were not an official stat when he played, it was estimated by Atkins that he had at least twenty-five Sacks in one season and he was known as one of the pass rushers of his day.
He is a member of both the College and Pro Football Hall of Fame.
We here at Notonhalloffame.com would like to extend our condolences to the friends and family of Doug Atkins at this time.
Atkins, a product of the University of Tennessee, was a freak of nature for his time. Standing at six foot eight and weighing 280 pounds, Atkins was a physical specimen the likes of which the National Football League had never seen, at least not someone who possessed as much skill as he did.
Drafted eleventh overall by the Cleveland Browns in 1953, the Defensive End would be traded to the Chicago Bears and would emerge as a star for the “Monsters of the Midway”. In Chicago, Atkins would help the Bears win the 1961 NFL Championship and would go to eight Pro Bowls and made a First Team All Pro.
At the age of 37, Atkins would finish his career with the expansion New Orleans Saints, and would have his number retired by the team due to the high regard he was held in.
To put in perspective the type of player that Atkins was, he was a player who both Johnny Unitas and Dick Butkus said they were afraid of. Butkus was afraid of him? Damn!
While Sacks were not an official stat when he played, it was estimated by Atkins that he had at least twenty-five Sacks in one season and he was known as one of the pass rushers of his day.
He is a member of both the College and Pro Football Hall of Fame.
We here at Notonhalloffame.com would like to extend our condolences to the friends and family of Doug Atkins at this time.
2016 HOF Debate: Lee Smith
Dec 31, 2015
Published in
Hall of Fame Debates
Last year, we did our first ever debate on Notinhalloffame.com where we tackled the Hall of Fame merit of twenty-four men who are on the Hall of Fame ballot, in what was in our opinion the most loaded ballot in our lifetime.
Since it was so much fun last time, we thought we would do it again!
One thing that has not changed is the number. We will again debate twenty-four men who are on the ballot.
What has changed are the ones debating. Last year I had the pleasure of having DDT, the curator of DDT’s Pop Flies blog and D.K. of the Phillies Archivist blog. This year, Spheniscus, who has participated in past Rock and Roll discussions, will be joining me.
Chairman: Lee Smith retired as the all-time leading leader in Saves, and here we are entering his fourteenth year on the ballot where he came off of a 30.2 percentage, 20 points lower than what he got in 2012.
How did he plummet so bad? I think a large part of that is because the stat of the Save is not what it was and when you look at his advanced stats, he isn’t what he should be in reference to other closers. His 29.6 bWAR and 25.4 JAWS put him ahead of new ballot relievers, Trevor Hoffman and Billy Wagner but with Smith what gets me is that unlike Hoffman, I never felt that Smith was a dominant closer, and what I mean is that did I ever feel he was one of the top two or three in the game.
I think what dissuades me the most about Smith is that for a reliever, how much he didn’t matter when the light shone brightest (his playoff numbers are terrible) and for all of the Saves he accumulated, how many do people remember?
Spheniscus, this is a guy who every year I talk myself more and more out of the Hall.
Spheniscus: I saw him play for two and a half seasons during my impressionable years when I followed every pitch of every game. Never once did I realize that he might be a Hall of Famer some day. All we talked about was how Smith wasn’t as good as the Steamer, Bob Stanley. And really, Bob Stanley wasn’t that good.
When we traded him to the Cardinals for former Twins “great” Tom Brunansky, there isn’t a Sox fan I know who didn’t think we got the better of the deal. Although, it helps that Brunansky made an incredible play in the right field corner to clinch a Sox playoff berth on the last game of the 1990 (the “Morgan Magic”) season. I mean we thought so highly of Smith that we were psyched when another former Twins “great” (and my former neighbor) Jeff Reardon was signed to replace him. And neither Reardon nor Brunansky are ever sniffing the Hall.
I already did his stats in the Trevor Hoffman section and I agree with you, he just doesn’t make it on paper. But at no point does he make it in reputation either. Literally the definition of a compiler. And a compiler in a category that no one cared about until Rivera retired. If someone passes Rivera in career saves people will notice. No one noticed when Hoffman passed Smith. And no one noticed with Rivera passed Smith either. I have 22 other people on this list ahead of him in my opinion. He’s not getting in. Ever.
Chairman: B. I. N. G. O.
The Chairman cannot even remotely disagree with anything you said…however…
I can disagree with my own thoughts.
Had I a ballot twelve years ago I very well might have voted for Smith, erroneously believing that being the all-time leader in Saves should warrant him serious consideration for the Hall of Fame, and that would have been the wrong choice to make.
There is no other stat in Baseball (and yes I will include wins and losses) that you can poke more holes in than the save. You can stink and still get a save. You can throw one pitch and get a save. You have no opportunity to pick up a save if your team is never winning late in the game. You called Lee Smith a compiler, and sure enough when I looked him up in Webster’s, there he was looking like he just came off of an advertisement for Soul Glo.
There is no “lights out” feeling when Smith took the mound. His playoff stats are not good, which was only 5.1 innings with an ERA near 9. Some difference maker if he hardly got his team to the dance, and when he showed up it was the chicken dance.
You called it when you as a Boston fan didn’t care when he left. Did they at Wrigley either?
He got over 50% in 2012 but last year he barely topped 30%. He was lucky to get that.
Spheniscus: And he won’t get that 15th year on the ballot bump either. If you had to choose between Hoffman and Smith for the 10th vote on your ballot, you would take Hoffman (again, you should take Billy Wagner over either but no one is going to do that). And believe me, he is the 10th vote on a lot of people’s ballots. My guess is that he ends up in the 20s and we unfortunately have this “debate” again next year. Then he mercifully drops off the ballot. This is one case where the new 10 year limit would have actually helped.
Chairman: He will finish with his lowest total, and yes, he is now the third best reliever on the ballot.
I will go one step further in that he will never make a Veteran’s ballot in the future.
My fictional vote is a no, and my prediction echoes yours: 24%.
Spheniscus: Looking at the list, he probably finishes somewhere around 12th overall. Last year, 12th got 12.9%. That seems like a big drop, so I’ll say 20%.
Since it was so much fun last time, we thought we would do it again!
One thing that has not changed is the number. We will again debate twenty-four men who are on the ballot.
What has changed are the ones debating. Last year I had the pleasure of having DDT, the curator of DDT’s Pop Flies blog and D.K. of the Phillies Archivist blog. This year, Spheniscus, who has participated in past Rock and Roll discussions, will be joining me.
Chairman: Lee Smith retired as the all-time leading leader in Saves, and here we are entering his fourteenth year on the ballot where he came off of a 30.2 percentage, 20 points lower than what he got in 2012.
How did he plummet so bad? I think a large part of that is because the stat of the Save is not what it was and when you look at his advanced stats, he isn’t what he should be in reference to other closers. His 29.6 bWAR and 25.4 JAWS put him ahead of new ballot relievers, Trevor Hoffman and Billy Wagner but with Smith what gets me is that unlike Hoffman, I never felt that Smith was a dominant closer, and what I mean is that did I ever feel he was one of the top two or three in the game.
I think what dissuades me the most about Smith is that for a reliever, how much he didn’t matter when the light shone brightest (his playoff numbers are terrible) and for all of the Saves he accumulated, how many do people remember?
Spheniscus, this is a guy who every year I talk myself more and more out of the Hall.
Spheniscus: I saw him play for two and a half seasons during my impressionable years when I followed every pitch of every game. Never once did I realize that he might be a Hall of Famer some day. All we talked about was how Smith wasn’t as good as the Steamer, Bob Stanley. And really, Bob Stanley wasn’t that good.
When we traded him to the Cardinals for former Twins “great” Tom Brunansky, there isn’t a Sox fan I know who didn’t think we got the better of the deal. Although, it helps that Brunansky made an incredible play in the right field corner to clinch a Sox playoff berth on the last game of the 1990 (the “Morgan Magic”) season. I mean we thought so highly of Smith that we were psyched when another former Twins “great” (and my former neighbor) Jeff Reardon was signed to replace him. And neither Reardon nor Brunansky are ever sniffing the Hall.
I already did his stats in the Trevor Hoffman section and I agree with you, he just doesn’t make it on paper. But at no point does he make it in reputation either. Literally the definition of a compiler. And a compiler in a category that no one cared about until Rivera retired. If someone passes Rivera in career saves people will notice. No one noticed when Hoffman passed Smith. And no one noticed with Rivera passed Smith either. I have 22 other people on this list ahead of him in my opinion. He’s not getting in. Ever.
Chairman: B. I. N. G. O.
The Chairman cannot even remotely disagree with anything you said…however…
I can disagree with my own thoughts.
Had I a ballot twelve years ago I very well might have voted for Smith, erroneously believing that being the all-time leader in Saves should warrant him serious consideration for the Hall of Fame, and that would have been the wrong choice to make.
There is no other stat in Baseball (and yes I will include wins and losses) that you can poke more holes in than the save. You can stink and still get a save. You can throw one pitch and get a save. You have no opportunity to pick up a save if your team is never winning late in the game. You called Lee Smith a compiler, and sure enough when I looked him up in Webster’s, there he was looking like he just came off of an advertisement for Soul Glo.
There is no “lights out” feeling when Smith took the mound. His playoff stats are not good, which was only 5.1 innings with an ERA near 9. Some difference maker if he hardly got his team to the dance, and when he showed up it was the chicken dance.
You called it when you as a Boston fan didn’t care when he left. Did they at Wrigley either?
He got over 50% in 2012 but last year he barely topped 30%. He was lucky to get that.
Spheniscus: And he won’t get that 15th year on the ballot bump either. If you had to choose between Hoffman and Smith for the 10th vote on your ballot, you would take Hoffman (again, you should take Billy Wagner over either but no one is going to do that). And believe me, he is the 10th vote on a lot of people’s ballots. My guess is that he ends up in the 20s and we unfortunately have this “debate” again next year. Then he mercifully drops off the ballot. This is one case where the new 10 year limit would have actually helped.
Chairman: He will finish with his lowest total, and yes, he is now the third best reliever on the ballot.
I will go one step further in that he will never make a Veteran’s ballot in the future.
My fictional vote is a no, and my prediction echoes yours: 24%.
Spheniscus: Looking at the list, he probably finishes somewhere around 12th overall. Last year, 12th got 12.9%. That seems like a big drop, so I’ll say 20%.