23 Comments
User's avatar
Cris's avatar

Link not working

Matthew Insley's avatar

Link not working. Has the decision been made already?

BelugaWhale's avatar

Link not working. Am I too late?

Steven Kerr's avatar

He's already writing about Grienke! No one vote for Grienke and we'll get the 11 who missed! If the lockout taught me anything it is that we need to game the system for every last scrap potentially available, conscience be damned.

Mike's avatar

Can't wait to read more about Zack! Not much better reading than Joe writing about the wonderful quirks of what makes Grienke great!

Erik Lundegaard's avatar

Wow, that thing just keeps going, doesn't it. I think I cycled through it 50 times. Never saw Harmon Killebrew, by the way. He was #67 in your ur-list back in 2013-14 but bupkis since.

Rob Smith's avatar

My concern is that a lot of the Just Missed guys may end up being guys you already write about a lot. Like Greinke. I mean, obviously you write about them often because they're interesting. But at some point, do we really crave another Greinke story? That's not a rhetorical question, btw. I guess it's possible that there are things you haven't written about that we don't know that we want to hear. I guess I just argued both sides of that. I'm sure it will be great, lol.

steve.a's avatar

Some of these choices you already have written about in depth like D. Allen and Z. Grienke. Aren't these old posts still available? (Maybe there needs to be an index of some sort. You might make one during your spare time, Joe. Or a competent fan could. Probably there's a free do-it-yourself-index app available.)

Michael's avatar

Agreed. I feel like I've read enough of Joe's stuff on some of these guys (especially modern ones who have been up for the Hall of Fame recently like Ortiz or Sheffield) that I would rather hear about someone new.

Len Blonder's avatar

Joe…This won’t work on my iPhone or iPad.

mizerock's avatar

I got a message about the site being a security hazard, trying to steal my data

Tom Hitchner's avatar

About to do the quiz, but just want to note that the omission I was most surprised at was Craig Biggio, who Bill James had high in his own Top 100 players list—I have no opinion on who's right there but I would be curious to know why he didn't make your cut.

Rob Smith's avatar

Why Biggio didn't make the cut? I mean the argument against him pretty clearly is that he really only had one great season & was more of a compiler. He was never a serious MVP candidate in any year, though he did have two Top 5s. He's clearly on the bottom end of the HOF list of players.

Tom Hitchner's avatar

Okay, but compare him to Carlos Beltran, who Joe has at #98. Beltran never led the league in anything, only had one top-5 MVP season (though he did win ROY), and as far as I can tell had comparable stats to Biggio (better power, worse OBP, 70 WAR to Biggio's 65 and their careers were both 20 years). To be clear, I'm not saying Biggio deserves to be in and not Beltran, or that Beltran is overrated or anything like that. If Biggio is like #106 or whatever that's fine. I'm just curious, since Joe follows Bill James so closely, why he sees Biggio's case differently than Bill does.

Jeff's avatar

Made it through about 40 and then gave up.

SRB's avatar

Can we have a separate vote between Don Mattingly’s 80’s moustache vs. Keith Hernandez’s 80’s moustache?

Bob Waddell's avatar

Joe, you are the coolest

M Lowenthal's avatar

The next thing you write about Grienke should be a book that is at least as long The Baseball 100.

Tom Geraghty's avatar

All I can say is I hope Roy Hobbs is one of them

David Harris's avatar

Sort of funny but reasonable that an adjustment needs to be made for the "long ago" players. Funny, because I believe you and Tango originally stacked the deck against them in comparing raw numbers since they tended to outperform their peers by more than players today, and probably weren't as good even then given a smaller pool of players (whether in terms of population or functional population, given the Majors excluding Blacks). But reasonable, because historical knowledge is becoming more and more cursory even among enthusiastic and smart types like Baseball Tonight hosts and even GMs. I highly doubt Farhan Zaidi is poring over the 1937 batting leaders. Practical and applied knowledge seems to be the main interest nowadays, and I'm sure Tango is grounded in his belief that the old guys face an uphill climb in a popularity contest even judged by Joe Blogs sophisticates.