My problem with Heyman is not that he has a different opinion, but that he pulled it out of thin air. He doesn’t cite a statistical argument, a contextual one (did Bert benefit from playing on great teams? was he hurt by playing on poor ones?) or an anecdotal one (how did Bert do against big-game Jack Morris in the postseason? how well did he work and play with others?). Instead, he just said that Bert didn’t “feel like a Hall of Famer.” That’s a pretty weak argument, in my opinion.

Now I’m going to do a little speculating, something that guys with HOF ballots admit to doing (see articles about Bagwell and possible PEDs). Given Bert’s notorious prickliness, I wonder if he offended Heyman on a personal level, thus pushing Heyman into the “I Don’t Like Bert” camp. Bert probably has met Heyman at some point. . . maybe he didn’t endear himself to Heyman, especially given Heyman’s very public position regarding Bert’s HOF credentials. That would explain the “I’m not voting for the guy because I don’t want to” argument from Heyman’s side.

If you want to find a more thoughtful take on his candidacy, look no further than Heyman’s colleague at SI, Tom Verducci. He makes Bert look like an ass, but figures he should be in anyway.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/tom_verducci/01/04/hall.of.fame.ballot/index.html?eref=sihp

@Earl Battey: Thanks! To be honest, I owe a lot of thanks to the statisticians and writers who blazed the trail for me (Bill James, Pete Palmer, Rich Lederer, Tom Tango, Sean Smith, etc.).

I think Heyman’s pretty much right on with comparing Blyleven to Sutton/Niekro vs. Tom Seaver. My WAR research actually showed that Blyleven was never as great as Carlton (Carlton had 2 8.0+ WAR to Blyleven’s 1) but Blyleven had a longer peak (10 5.0+ WAR seasons to Carlton’s 7.). Based on my peak-adjusted WAR, Blyleven and Niekro are ahead of Carlton.

Heyman’s ballot this year isn’t too bad (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/12/15/jon-heyman-reveals-his-hall-of-fame-ballot-so-once-again-we-discuss-jack-morris-and-bert-blyleven/). He did vote for Alomar, Larkin, and Raines. I don’t mind him voting for Dale Murphy, Don Mattingly, and Dave Parker as they don’t have a shot and I prefer they get some votes vs. fall off the ballot. Just don’t like Jack Morris over Blyleven and no Bagwell or Trammell…

@Al Swedgin: Me too. I grew up a Yankee fan so was privileged to see Henderson in his prime. I don’t think I appreciated it as much as I would now though…I don’t recall a young Rudy saying “Wow, Henderson walked again! His OBP is awesome!”

http://miscbaseball.wordpress.com/2010/05/02/tim-raines-coming-back-to-the-expos-on-may-1987/

Here’s number 17.

“17. Bert Blyleven. I will consider myself fortunate when I am voted into the Hall of Fame, and understand that while I had a great career, I am not Tom Seaver or Steve Carlton but rather Don Sutton and Phil Niekro, near-great pitchers who were borderline candidates who gained enshrinement. I will also thank the small coterie of Internet zealots who kept calling attention to the value of strikeouts, shutouts, complete games, longevity and durability and helped me rise from 14 percent of the votes in my second year of eligibility to more than 75 percent and act gracefully upon hearing the expected good news.”

Rudy, thank you for being an important part of the “small coterie of Internet zealots” who have called “attention to the value of strikeouts, shutouts, complete games, longevity and durability.” Otherwise, how would professional sportswriters have any way of knowing those things might be important? I know that wacky metrics like “longevity and durability” have long been traits valued only by the most radical statheads and sabermetricians, but maybe they will start gaining mainstream appeal if you keep up the proselytizing.

Man, Heyman is a tool.

The fun facts are hilarious too. Good work!