NEW YORK _ Having just completed and mailed back my Hall of Fame ballot, I want to make one thing very clear: If Placido Polanco is not elected unanimously, it won't be because of me.
Yes, that's right. One of the first people I checked off was the player whose name probably drew the most immediate "what the hell?" sneers from critics questioning how the Baseball Writers Association could include him on the ballot. But let me tell you something. Placido Polanco is no joke, neither his presence on the Hall of Fame ballot nor a vote for him that anyone chooses to do.
If nothing else, consider it a vote for defense, for Polanco is the only player in history to hold the lifetime fielding percentage records at two different positions _ second base (.993) and third base (.983). He also holds the lifetime records for most consecutive error-less games at second (186) and most consecutive chances (911) without an error. In addition, Polanco is one of only two players in history to win Gold Glove awards at multiple positions and the only one to have won them both in the infield.
He was also no slouch as a hitter with a lifetime batting average of .297 with 2,142 hits and 1,009 runs. Who knew?
Now, full disclosure, I have always considered myself a very strict voter, who has never used up all 10 spots allotted on the ballot. My first two criteria are quite simple.
(1) The "see" test. Did I look at a player through the years and say 'I'm looking at a Hall of Famer'?
(2) The boldface test. Did this man dominate the game at his position? As in the "denotes led league" boldface on his Baseball Encyclopedia page (or Baseball Reference's website).
In all the years I watched Polanco, I never thought to myself, 'I'm looking at a Hall-of-Famer' but I am voting for him this year because he does have some extraordinary defensive records and I'm hoping enough people will vote for him to keep him from falling under the necessary 5 percent to remain on the ballot.
OK. So that's my case for Placido Polanco. Now some observations on the rest of the ballot:
Staying on the subject of defense, I am a staunch supporter of Omar Vizquel, of whom I DID say 'I'm looking at a Hall of Famer' every time I saw him play. He was the greatest defensive shortstop I ever saw, better than Ozzie Smith, better than Luis Aparicio. He won 11 Gold Gloves including one at age 39. Boldface? Led AL shortstops in fielding percentage six times and is the all-time leader in fielding percentage for shortstops (.985). Plus, he was a very good offensive player. He hit .272 lifetime with 2,877 hits (43rd all time) 1,445 runs and 404 stolen bases to Ozzie's .262/2,460/1,257/580 and Aparicio's .262/2,677/1,335/506, and he led the American League in sacrifice hits four times. The analytics bunch all bad mouth Vizquel, finding all sorts of convoluted formulas to show why he doesn't measure up as a Hall of Famer. Maybe if they'd actually seen him play, they'd think differently. Vizquel got 37 percent in his first time on the ballot last year and hopefully he'll get a little more love this year and the years after. For what it's worth, it took his Venezuelan idol, Aparicio, seven years on the ballot to be elected.
The same analytics mavens who disparage Vizquel love Scott Rolen, who got 10.2 percent in his first time on the ballot last year. I greatly admired Rolen as both a player and a person. He was an excellent third baseman and a credit to the game, but no way was he a Hall of Famer _ not after only seven seasons of playing 140 or more games. It wasn't Rolen's fault he was constantly plagued by injuries, but in 17 seasons in the big leagues, there are no boldface numbers on his record. He never once led the league in anything.
On the other hand, there is Jeff Kent, who the analytics folk also hate. Kent is punished by them because he was barely average defensively at second base. But offensively he was the dominant second baseman of his era, with eight 100-RBI seasons, three 100-run seasons, four silver slugger awards, five All-Star nominations, 560 doubles (28th all time), 2,461 hits and a Most Valuable Player award in 2000. He is also still the holder of the all-time record of 351 homers for a second baseman, more than Rogers Hornsby, more than Joe Morgan. I don't know how much more you have to do, but Kent got a paltry 14.5 percent last year and will probably keep falling.
Another guy whose record hasn't yet gotten the support it should is Curt Schilling, although there's no mystery to that. You could make the case that Schilling was one of the greatest postseason pitchers in history, but since his playing days he's also managed to become one of the greatest jerks in history, between espousing his extremist political views and biting the hands that would feed him by calling the baseball writers, "some of the worst human beings I've ever known. They are scumbags." That said, Schilling's record is filled with boldface, twice leading the league in wins, innings and strikeouts, and four times in complete games. In the postseason, he was 11-2 with a 2.23 ERA in starts (5th all-time in wins). It's why I vote for him every year (albeit holding my nose and dreading having to ever hear his Hall of Fame acceptance speech).
Finally, for the millions of Yankee fans who will undoubtedly express their outage all over talk radio and social media if Mariano Rivera doesn't become the first player ever unanimously voted into the Hall of Fame (yes, I voted him!), do not despair, for I'm sure he will be one day be unanimously voted into Heaven.
