Hall of Fame voters seem to ignore certain sluggers

Sammy Sosa and Gary Sheffield have more than 1,100 home runs, yet even Hall of Fame voters who don’t mind steroids won’t vote for them

How do you hit more than 500 home runs and still get ignored by Hall of Fame voters?

In the case of Gary Sheffield and Sammy Sosa, it’s more than just steroid suspicions. Those also surround Barry Bonds, yet Bonds annually pulls more than half the Hall of Fame votes. This year Sheffield and Sosa both linger at 13 percent, which puts them just above Omar Vizquel (80 home runs).

If steroids were the only question, then Sheffield and Sosa both would logically be closer to Bonds,  who is presently receiving about 71 percent support.

In fact only about 25 percent of Bonds voters are also voting for Sosa or Sheffield. Beyond that, Sheffield and Sosa backers can’t even agree among themselves. As of Jan. 13, each had received 23 votes, yet only five voters listed both men on their ballots.

The lack of support may be partly explainable by the assumption that there is hope for electing Bonds, while the Sosa and Sheffield candidacies are numerically doomed.   Why, Bonds voters may be asking, throw away our votes, even if we personally view Sosa and Sheffield as deserving, when there are other candidates who actually might be elected, if not now then one day?

But as strange as it sounds, there is also a statistical case against Sosa, and to a lesser extent against Sheffield. Granted, 606 and 509 home runs are a lot…but maybe that’s all Sosa and Sheffield have. Is it enough?

The table below measures Sosa and Sheffield in 10 categories against 13 Hall of Famers who rank close to them in career home runs. It’s august company, consisting of Willie Mays, Ken Griffey Jr., Jim Thome, Frank Robinson, Harmon Killebrew, Reggie Jackson, Frank Thomas, Ted Williams, Ernie Banks, Eddie Mathews, Mel Ott, Eddie Murray and Willie MCovey.

The question is how among the 15 — counting themselves — do Sosa and Sheffield stack up in other categories particularly critical to Hall of Fame-worthy sluggers? Here’s the data, comparing the career numbers of Sosa and Sheffield with the average of the selected Hall of Famers:

More from Call to the Pen

• Philadelphia Phillies, ready for a stretch run, bomb St. Louis Cardinals
• Philadelphia Phillies: The 4 players on the franchise’s Mount Rushmore
• Boston Red Sox fans should be upset over Mookie Betts’ comment
• Analyzing the Boston Red Sox trade for Dave Henderson and Spike Owen
• 2023 MLB postseason likely to have a strange look without Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals

The comparison with Hall of Famers of Sosa’s skill set suggests that, by their admittedly high standards, his resume is questionable. Among the 15, he ranks dead last in career WAR, where his 58.6 is 30 points below the average of his HOF peers. He ranks among the bottom third in all but two categories, one of those being home runs

The case for Sheffield is more plausible, although hardly overpowering. He ranks among the top half in only three of the 10 categories, and one of those is plate appearances. So he plainly merits a participation trophy.

As for most of the rest, he’s basically low-middle, with six showings between 10th and 14th. Like Sosa, his career 60.5 WAR is well below the average for the group, and in fact exceeds only Sosa’s. His 140 OPS+ is also low, but it is better than Sosa, Murray, Banks, Griffey or Jackson.

You can certainly make the argument that being low-middle in that group is a Hall of Fame credential. But given the low status of both Sosa and Stargell in the current tabulation, that argument doesn’t appear to be persuading many Hall of Fame voters, even the ones who are willing to vote for a suspected steroid user.