High Hopes: A Phillies Podcast - Mound Visit Ep. 1: Evaluating Chase Utley's Hall of Fame Candidacy

Episode Date: November 13, 2018

It's the first episode of Mound Visit with Tim Kelly. On this episode, Tim welcomes on Jerry Crasnick and Danny Knobler to evaluate if Chase Utley is a Hall of Famer or not.  See omnystudio.com/policies/listener for privacy information. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Introducing TD Insurance for Business, with customized coverage options for your business. Because at TD Insurance, we understand that your business is unique, so your business insurance should be too. Contact a licensed TD Insurance advisor to learn more. Every Canadian dairy farm is unique. That's why every farmer takes charge of their own unique environmental farm plan. Also drawing from 57 environmental practices. My plan starts with soil health. And part of mine includes biodiversity.

Why care so much? Because Canadian dairy farmers hold themselves to higher standards. That's what's behind the blue cow logo. Dairy Farmers of Canada. This is the High Hopes Podcast. High Hopes. It's a bunch of baseball nerds. Well, without the computers.

Talking about the Philadelphia Phillies. On Radio.com and Sports Radio 94 WIP. What's going on High Hopes listeners? I'm Tim Kelly. No James or Jack in this episode, but they aren't going anywhere. Instead, they've asked me to join the High Hopes listeners, I'm Tim Kelly. No James or Jack in this episode, but they aren't going anywhere. Instead, they've asked me to join the High Hopes team, so I'll be providing extra content in addition to their tremendous shows. What I'm

going to do for the High Hopes feed is I'm going to give some commentary, but also what I hope are insightful and important interviews as well. For those of you who don't know me, I'm kind of a jack of all trades at WIP. I produce, I'm a contributor to 94wip.com, and I work in promotions as well. Additionally,

I've been writing about Philly sports on the internet since 2013, so you've probably seen my work here or there. Right now, I'm the editorial director at phillysnation.com, and shameless plug, you can follow me on Twitter at Tim Kelly Sports like Jack I'm a graduate of Bloomsburg University I was just a couple years behind Jack but we were classmates and I'm happy to see him succeeding now because I do remember us sitting in class texting about the future and hoping we'd have opportunities like we both do now right in front of us so excited for the Bloom takeover and in any any event, that's enough about me. So in today's show, we're going to look at the recently retired Chase Utley's Hall of Fame case.

We'll talk to a couple Hall of Fame voters. But before we get to that, here's a general overview of Utley's candidacy. Blocked by Placido Polanco, Utley didn't become the Phillies regular second baseman until his age 26 season. Between 2010 and 2012, chronic knee injuries, ones that at the time appeared to be career threatening, limited Utley to just 301 of a possible 486 regular season games. We now know that those injuries were not career threatening in the sense that they ended his career, which some thought was a possibility at that time, but they certainly were career altering. And when you add that to him not becoming an everyday second baseman until he was 26 years old, it makes for an interesting Hall of Fame case for Utley.

There are just 36 Hall of Famers with less than 2,000 career hits, many of whom would not be elected by today's standards, or they were players that played in the Negro Leagues prior to African-American players being allowed to play in the majors. So there were a lot of qualifiers for those players and Utley isn't necessarily going to get those qualifiers. So Utley finished his career with 1,885 hits among the counting numbers that he's going to fall short of in traditional Hall of Fame standards. Despite remarkable longevity, Utley was the oldest

active position player that played the full 2018 season because Ichiro didn't last a month into the 2018 season. But Utley's going to fall short even with that longevity in terms of counting numbers, which will make him a hard sell to many old school voters. So the crowd that long championed the case of guys like Jack Morris that went by more traditional numbers or the eye test, they may not be as high on Utley or they may think he doesn't have the numbers when you look at the back of the baseball card to warrant induction. At the same time, Sabermetrics voters are going to be very high on Utley's Hall of Fame case. I know I've seen Brian Kenny and a handful of people talk about this is someone that's not even a question. He's a Hall of Famer.

So here's a few of those type of numbers. The average Hall of Fame second baseman has a War 7 of 44.5. Now War 7 is the sum of a player's seven highest career single season war total. So they do not have to be seven in a row I believe in Utley's case they were seven seasons in a row but they do not have to be seven seasons in any event like I said the average Hall of Fame second baseman has a war seven of 44 and a half Utley finished his career with a war seven of 49.3 which is higher than Hall of Famers Roberto Alomar, Craig Biggio, and Joe Gordon. Utley's Jaws number is 57.3 slightly topping the 57.0 average of a Hall of Fame second baseman. Now for those of you who don't know what Jaws is it was created by Jay Jaffe. Baseball reference

defines it as a means to measure a player's Hall of Fame worthiness by comparing him to the players at his position who are already enshrined using advanced metrics to account for wide variations in offensive levels that have occurred throughout the game's history. So essentially, it takes a candidate and compares them while adjusting park factors and a variety of different other things to those at their position that are already in the Hall of Fame. So in that case, Utley also tops it. In terms of B-War, he does fall a little bit short. His 65.4 career total isn't that short though. It falls just short of the 69.5 average of a Hall of Fame

second baseman. Craig Biggio and Roberto Alomar were elected to the Hall of Fame within the last decade while both falling short of the average B-War of a Hall of Fame second baseman. Granted, their counting numbers were much better than Utley's, so they certainly had that working in their favor. Despite not playing, and this is my favorite number, despite not playing more than 100 games in a season until 2005, Utley finished the 2000s with a 40.2 F4, a higher mark than Manny Ramirez,

who would be a Hall of Famer if it weren't for the performance-enhancing drug suspensions and various failed tests. Adrian Beltre, who's going to be a lock to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer. Jim Tomey, who was a Hall of Famer. So that's just among a few Hall of Fame caliber players. And I understand they play different positions, but it still speaks to a lot. And it was Utley, not Jeff Kent, Alfonso Soriano,

or the aforementioned Polanco, who Sports Illustrated named as the second baseman on their 2000s All-Decade team. And again, he didn't play in over 100 games until 2005. So he started behind the eight ball compared to some of these other candidates who they actually all had over 1,000 more played appearances in the decade than Utley did. Utley was a six-time All-Star who appeared in the postseason nine times in the final 12 seasons of his career.

In 2008 and 2009, the first runs in the World Series came off the bat of Utley, both home runs. His 2009 World Series performance was a historic performance, one that came during a five-year stretch that was the most successful in Philly's franchise history. Utley was perhaps the best player, and I don't think it's a perhaps, but for the sake of not getting sidetracked, Utley was perhaps the best player on the 2000s Phillies who you could make a case were the most successful

National League franchise during said decade. He's probably the most beloved Philly of all time and finished his career in Los Angeles, another major market where he played on successful teams and will be remembered positively. Right or wrong, being well-liked in two major markets isn't the worst thing for a prospective Hall of Fame candidate. With that said, New York is a major market, one that employs the most local beat writers

of any city in the country and is often home to many national writers and many national writers started their career as beat writers in New York. And at least a portion of New York won't remember Chase Utley fondly. Utley did have the aforementioned dominant World Series performance against the Yankees in 2009. He tied Reggie Jackson and George Springer since tied it as well with five World Series home runs, which is a record. And remember, Utley did that in six games with a team that really wasn't hitting around him.

So it was a remarkable feat. And frankly, I'll go to my grave thinking that there's at least a case that he should have won World Series MVP, despite the fact that the Phillies lost the series in six. In any event, he was an all-time Mets killer. He hit 39 home runs and drove in 116 runs in his career against the Mets. And obviously, the right field foul pull at Citi Field went on to be known as Utley's corner. So Utley's performance against the New York team should work

in his favor, though it is fair to wonder if his takeout slide that broke Ruben Tejada's fibula in Game 2 of the 2015 LCS will be held against him by any voters. Considering the controversial slide inspired a new rule, which is known to the public as the Utley Rule, it's certainly not something that's going to be forgotten, and right or wrong, it's going to be part of his legacy. The other thing worth factoring in is that part of getting elected to the Hall of Fame now involves gaining a passionate backing from a mix of voters, media members, and fans. Edgar Martinez, who is entering the final year of his Hall of Fame eligibility, received 70.4% of the vote in 2017 after receiving just 36.4% of the vote in his first year on the ballot in 2010. Social media and more ballots being made

public have contributed to Martinez's remarkable rise in the amount of votes he's received. Some voters have simply realized they were incorrect on how they voted on past ballots and in my mind, good for them for doing so. Others have gotten smarter due to the

increased availability of Sabre metrics with baseball reference and fan graphs and baseball savant go down the list, which they add those in with the traditional means and it gives them an even clearer picture than they had even wrong on so I guess by any means necessary if it gets the case right so there are there's only so much of this energy to go around all the energy is going to be on Edgar Martinez this year who figures to get into the hall of fame he's just short and the funny thing is nothing has changed since last year statistically about Edgar Martinez nothing's changed since 2010 and yet you have a pretty good feeling heading into his last year of eligibility on the ballot that he's going to get the necessary 75% of votes to be elected to the Hall of Fame. So it kind of shows you what a petty process Hall of Fame voting is and why you need these type of energized groups. And I think they are groups.

They're not just fans. They're not just writers. In some cases, we see people become advocates for these different Hall of Fame candidates. So it'll be interesting. There is only so much of that energy to go around. And even after Martinez is either voted in or falls off the ballot, Scott Rowland, Andrew Jones, Mike Messina, Curt Schilling, Larry Walker, they are all players who a lot of sabermetrically inclined people believe haven't gotten a fair shake on the ballot.

And then you also are going to have to deal with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens who have interesting Hall of Fame cases for entirely different reasons because they're getting late in their time on the ballot. We could do an entire show on Bonds and Clemens, and it really is going to be interesting to see what happens with those two because it impacts what will happen ultimately with Utley because you'll have guys like David Ortiz and Alex Rodriguez who have different levels of connections to performance-enhancing drugs.

On one hand, it's hard to have a museum about baseball without having the greatest players of all time. On the other hand, these guys cheated. So it's going to be difficult for a lot of Hall of Fame voters to wrestle with it. But there will become a time where Chase Soutley has the energy behind him from the analytically inclined Sabermetra community. And having that energy behind you is certainly

important if you're not Pedro Martinez or what Derek Jeter is going to be or what Randy Johnson was where you get on the ballot and it's no doubt about it a lot of these guys need to get different groups behind them because I've always viewed Hall of Fame voting as the voters should look at it and treat it like a 400-level college class where they say, I'm going to dedicate hours and hours and hours to being able to have that. I mean, they voted to get, or they paid, excuse me, to get this vote. So you'd think that they would take this seriously. And a lot of Hall of Fame voters do.

But then you also get Hall of Fame voters that will simply look at the back of a baseball card. Kurt Schilling, who ironically this works against in many cases, talked about, oh, if I had to vote for the Hall of Fame, I would simply look at the name and if my first thought, if I have to hesitate at all and say, oh, are they a Hall of Famer or not? I wouldn't vote for them. Now, to me, that's silly, but unfortunately, there are Hall of Fame voters

who look that way, and if that's the case, Chase Utley probably will fall short in a lot of their minds, despite having one of the greatest peaks a second baseman has ever had. So we're going to talk to two different Hall of Fame voters

in this podcast. We're going to talk to Jerry Krasnick, who does a tremendous job covering the MLB, and then we're also going to talk to Danny Nobler. He's with Bleacher Report now. He's been with CBS. He wrote in Detroit for a long time.

Danny's a great baseball mind as well. So we're going to talk to them and get two different voters. Because you have my perspective, but that only goes so far because I'm not a Hall of Fame voter. At least not yet. So let's listen first to Jerry Krasnick's thoughts on whether Chase Utley has not a Hall of Fame voter, at least not yet. So let's listen first to Jerry Krasnick's thoughts on whether Chase Utley has a legitimate Hall of Fame case. To discuss Utley's Hall of Fame case, we welcome the great Jerry Krasnick to High Hopes. Jerry, what is Chase Utley's legacy to those inside the sport? Well, I think it's very strong, Tim, just in terms of his, you know,

the respect that he engenders just with the way he went about it, the kind of teammate he was, his attention to detail. You know, he's a guy who people in baseball, the scouts and the people who play it, the managers and coaches, they always thought of him as the epitome of a guy who did it the right way. You know, he studied and prepared. He was a great base runner.

He was a clutch hitter. He was a guy who'd take a fastball on the bat to get on base. So, you know, at times I'm sure publicly with the slide, you know, that he had against the Mets, he sort of got a little bit of a villainous reputation. But you really didn't hear much of that around the clubhouses. And, you know, I really think that of all the players that I've come across, he'd be right at or near the top of the list in terms of a boat as respected and beloved a teammate as you could get.

So Robinson Cano was once viewed as a Hall of Fame lock and probably the best second baseman of his era. He was suspended this past year for performance-enhancing drug use. His former teammate Mark Teixeira kind of publicly cast doubt on a lot of Cano's career, and that may not be fair, but I think that's the conclusion a lot of people walked away with based on Teixeira's comments, saying that he essentially wasn't that surprised by the suspension. Do you think at all that Cano now having a questionable Hall of Fame case will help Chase Utley?

I don't really know that it has an impact. You know, I think they're two different cases. I mean, Cano certainly is going to suffer greatly because of this, and he's a guy who I think when you look at the production and just the length of time and accounting numbers, he looked like a pretty big lock to get in, and that's not going to be the case anymore. You know, Chase Utley, his peak was so good.

The problem was it just wasn't maybe long enough in the eyes of a lot of people, I think. You know, we really was an elite level, arguably, in the top handful of players in baseball, but probably for about six years. You know, and I think that the one thing that's going to hurt Chase is the overall counting numbers and some of the other things that people look at in terms of overall achievement, you know, might have fallen a little bit short just because he didn't stay healthy long enough. Now, I talked about this with Danny

Nobler. I will talk about this with him later in the podcast. A lot of getting into the Hall of Fame right now when you don't have a slam dunk case appears to be getting some sort of passionate backing behind you. And we see with Edgar Martinez now who's shot up in terms of percentage of vote he's gotten each year, and this will be a crucial year, but he's only 3 or 4 percent away. Do you think when it's Utley's time, especially when he's late on the ballot, do you think he'll have that same type of passion behind him? You know, it's interesting because when you look at his overall wins above replacement,

I think, what is he, about in the high 60s or 70s? I mean, it's pretty high, you know. So I think some of the new numbers might help him. And there are, you know, certain guys who have that sort of benefactor. With Edgar, I just know that, you know, he's the guy who came up and really didn't get started until about age 26 in terms of being a producer, and then he was a DH, so that hurt him. He only has, I think, what, around 2,200 hits. But now you also look, and I think he has a 418 career on base percentage.

He's a 300, 400, 500 guy. Some of those numbers are pretty amazing. And the one thing about Edgar is I think a lot of his former teammates and people who are around him speak so glowingly of him. You know, when you have a guy like Randy Johnson or Pedro Martinez who say, hey, this is the best right-handed hitter we saw in our time in baseball, that's certainly helping him. So I think Edgar's going to get over the top. Again, I think there's just sort of a—to me, Chase didn't get to 2,000 hits, right? I think, what is he, about 1,800?

1,885 is what he finished with. Yeah, so I mean, I think there's a little bit of a mental block that some voters are going to have about that. I think for a guy like Chase, who was primarily an offensive second baseman, did not even be at 1,900 career hits, that's just going to hurt him. It's going to weigh against him, and his numbers aren't quite as overwhelming as Edgar's are, certainly offensively. So I think that's going to certainly complicate his case.

We're talking to Jerry Krasnick here on High Hopes. Of the 2008 Phillies, we don't know what Cole Hamels is going to finish his career with. Ryan Howard had years where you could say that's Hall of Fame caliber production, but I don't think anyone. Ryan Howard had years where you could say that's Hall of Fame caliber production, but I don't think anyone expects Ryan Howard to garner serious Hall of Fame interest. So it really comes down to, at least at this juncture, Jimmy Rollins and Chase Hudley. Of those 2008 Phillies, does Hudley have the best chance of them to be inducted into the Hall of Fame? You know, I've talked about this with Jason Stark some, I think, and I think he believes this, and I can

buy this. I think Jimmy Rollins might have a better case than Chase, just because he had, what, about 23, 24 hundred career hits as a shortstop, you know, and won an MVP. Problem was, his

on-base percentage wasn't very good, so I think that hurts him. But in terms of the overall numbers as a shortstop, I think he might have a more compelling case than Chase Utley. I think the issue is when you look at the eye test or whatever it is, some people just didn't feel like maybe Jimmy Rollins was as an elite player, but he was a really good player for a really long time. So I think people who bore into the numbers might actually come to the conclusion that Jimmy Rollins has a stronger case

than Chase Utley. But there was that five or six-year stretch where Chase Utley was amazing. And, again, he was one of the best players in baseball. I just think the injuries are going to make it pretty difficult for him. The overall body and portfolio of work, it's going to take a while when he gets on the ballot, I think, to generate that kind of support. And it's probably going to take a change in mindset for the voters to vote in somebody who doesn't even have a 1900 career ahead. So we're getting close to 2019 ballot season. Roy Halladay will be the most notable former affiliate on the ballot, although I guess you could say Curt Schilling as well. But

we're getting close to that time of the year. Chase Utley obviously now has a five-year gap. If he appeared on this year's ballot just for the sake of this argument, which direction without having done the full research would you lean in for Chase Utley? In terms of yes or no on Chase? Yeah. Yeah, I mean, for me, again, look, I admire and respect Chase Utley

as much as any player I've seen, you know, just from being around his team every day. But to me, I just think he's a little bit short. I just don't know that the peak is long enough to warrant him being a Hall of Famer. You know, it's a hard call, and sometimes we vote for guys who were great players for a short period of time. But to me, you know, you're talking about the Sandy Koufaxes and the Pedro Martinezes, and I just don't know if Chase's peak was long enough.

So I certainly would give him a lot of consideration and give him a very long look. But to me, I think it would be more a lean in the no direction than, you know, as opposed to the yes. Jerry Krasnick, thank you for joining us. All right, and then we welcome in Danny Nobler. Danny writes for Bleacher Report and then also, of course, has a Hall of Fame vote. So he's very qualified to talk on this topic. Danny, we'll start with this.

What do you think Chase Utley's legacy as a player is outside of Philadelphia? That's a good question, Tim. I think he's probably not as well appreciated outside Philadelphia as among Phillies fans. And maybe that's true of most players. But I think in his case, maybe even more so, just because so much of what he was when you watched him play and you saw the impact he had not just on a game but on a team was so big. And I think you could see that even if you just watched him a few times.

But obviously you were going to notice that a lot more when you watched him day after day, which obviously Phillies fans got a chance to do. So I think he's thought of outside Philadelphia as a very good player. I don't know if he is appreciated as much as he is among Phillies fans. So we've seen that part of getting elected in today's climate, if you're not Randy Johnson or Pedro Martinez, is that you kind of have to get a case behind you. You have to get a group of media members, of fans, sometimes even voters, that kind of build your case for you and put it to the forefront.

I think Edgar Martinez is the perfect example of this. Someone that was on the ballot but really didn't have a chance when he first got on and he got almost 71% of the vote last year. So do you think Utley is someone that when his time comes and there's people in front of him, there's Scott Rowland, there's Larry Walker, different people that the sabermetric community is going to get behind. But do you think Utley is someone that we're going to look at that maybe doesn't have great numbers at first on the ballot but grows rather significantly in his time on the ballot?

I think there's a chance of that. You're right that he's going to be— the people who are just going to vote straight out on the numbers may very well overlook him. And so the chances of him getting in right away probably aren't that great. Maybe he will. Maybe I'll be surprised. But that would be my guess. And then after that, you're right. A lot of times, the guys who get in after a lot of years, they have to stay on the ballot early, which means they have to get at least 5% of the vote every year.

And then they have to have, people have to get behind them. And sometimes that's a case made by even one or two guys just pushing hard and eventually convincing other people. Sometimes it just builds. It can come from funny places. But I think you're probably right on that. There's a chance that he could be a guy who has to have a case built for him over the years he's on the ballot.

So I was thinking about outside of Philadelphia, sticking with that theme for a second, what Chase Utley's most memorable moment is. And while he had the world series he in 2080 at the first home run of the world series 2009 he had a historic world series outside of that the moment that comes to mind for me nationally may be the ruben cejada slide that led to the so-called oddly role do you think that that slide in any way will hurt him in his attempt to get into the Hall of Fame? Because he's someone that

can't be losing votes in any way, really. I don't believe so because I don't think people looked at it as opposed to Manny Machado this year where there was a lot of talk about it being a dirty play.

I think in Chase's case, well, certainly there were people who thought that he went in hard and that maybe the slide should have been punished, and certainly Mets fans looked at it a different way, and you would expect that given, first of all, that it was one of their players getting hurt, and second, that it was a player doing it who had been in the division and been a star player for a rival team at a time when both teams were very good. They haven't been all that many times. The Mets and Phillies have been competing at the top of the NL East, but those couple of years in 2007 and 2008, they certainly were.

And so that brought Utley in favor, in for me, whatever you want to call it, among Mets fans. But outside of Mets fans, I don't think Utley was looked at that way. I don't think that play is going to be something that hurts him. I think if anything, it would be remembered as part of the way he played, that he played the game hard to win all the time.

So no, overall, I don't think that's going to be what hurts him. We're talking to Danny Nobler of Bleacher Report here on iHopes, and Danny, of the 2008 Phillies, Cole Hamill' career is still going on. Ryan Howard struggled with injuries in the second half of his career. So really, of the guys that were on the 2008 team,

it's going to come down to Jimmy Rollins and Chase Sudley. Of the 2008 guys, do you believe Utley is the best Hall of Fame case? Probably, and I think you're right. I think the interesting thing about that group is any one of those guys had a stage of their career where they would have been considered Hall of Famers. And all of them had drop-offs in their career to the point where their overall numbers probably leave them short in some people's minds. And in a lot of ways they're similar uh that that they were really really really good top of the game best players in the game but people are going to question whether they were the best players in the game for long enough when you vote for the hall of fame i think one of the things you do

is you know you're supposed supposed to want to put the best players, the elite players from each era in the Hall of Fame. The problem when you start discussing that is how long do they have to be the best players? Perfect example, Dale Murphy was a back-to-back years

National League MVP and didn't get in. A lot of people voted for him, thought he should have, but he didn't have the length of career, at least not at the top of the game. Don Mattingly with the Yankees, similar. If you look at the peak of his career, you could have said he was a Hall of Famer, but it didn't last long enough. And for players where it doesn't last as long, then the peak has to be so good.

Somebody like a Sandy Koufax, whose career was cut short because of injury, but was so good during the time he was in that there was no question he was going in the Hall of Fame. With those Phillies guys, they were at the top of the game, but they didn't last as long at the very top of the game as maybe you would like to see. Now, I think each one of those guys has been good enough players that they'll get considered, and I think you're probably right

that Otley and Rollins will get the most consideration. But even with those two guys, they didn't last as long at the very top as you would want, and that makes them more borderline guys. It doesn't rule them out of it, because I do think they have a chance. I think Chase really has a chance. But it makes it a more borderline case, and it makes it one that you have to think a lot about before you cast the vote. There's some guys every year, not every year, but there's some guys that go on the ballot that you don't have to think about. Mariano Rivera is going on the ballot

for the first time this year. I don't think anybody who votes is going to have to spend an awful lot of time considering whether Mariano Rivera is a Hall of Famer, same with Ken Griffey first time this year, I don't think anybody who votes is going to have to spend an awful lot of time considering whether Mariano Rivera is a Hall of Famer, same with Ken Griffey Jr. went on the ballot, Frank Thomas went on the ballot. You didn't spend a lot of time thinking, is this guy a Hall of Famer? Because they did it over such a long period of time and were so good at the top of their game. These guys are guys you have to consider, and that doesn't mean they won't eventually

get in because there's a lot of guys who do every year. So perhaps the strange thing about Utley is he had pretty incredible longevity in the sense that Ichiro retired early in the season, or whatever happened with Ichiro. I don't know if he officially called it retiring. Yeah. He stopped playing. Yeah, he stopped playing. But for the bulk of the season chase edley was the oldest position player in the league and yet he falls short in a lot of these counting numbers because of injuries in his early 30s because of not coming up or not being a starting

player until he was 26 years old but does that longevity in your sense uh does that at all rule out some of the arguments about him not having the counting numbers? No, I think because longevity is part of it. And you can get in the Hall of

Fame without the totals and having a career where you didn't reach the 500 home runs, although obviously with the steroid era, people don't look at that the same as they once did. When you don't look at 1,500 RBIs,

when you don't look at some of those numbers, but at the same time, the 3,000 hits, things like that. But at the same time, if you're not going to have those numbers, then they're going to start looking at, well, what was, you know, maybe not batting average. People don't look as much at that now. What was your OPS for your career? What was your OPS plus?

What was your OPS plus in your 10 best years or your eight best years? What was your, some people look at war. What was your career war or what was your war in your 10 best seasons? Things like that. So you don't say, okay, he played X number of years, therefore he has to have X number of numbers, because you get credit for playing more years and you get credit for getting good for more years.

And the interesting thing about the Hall of Fame, and we discuss the MVP every year, and people say, well, we don't have an exact description for what makes the guy the MVP. Well, the Hall of Fame is similar and even maybe more so because you're dealing with multiple seasons. Every voter has to make his own determination. What constitutes a Hall of Famer? What level is it? How good does he have to be for how long for me to say that he was one of the all-time greats? Because that's really what we're saying. Was he one of the all-time greats? If you're going to put a guy on the Hall of Fame, you're saying he was one of the all-time greats. If you're going to put a guy in the Hall of Fame, you're saying he was one of the all-time greats. Well, how good a

career does he have to have had, and how long does that career, how long does he have to have been that good for you to make that determination? And those are determinations that each voter will make himself, and you can't really say one guy is necessarily

right or wrong in how he determines it. So, to say with certainty whether everybody's going to vote or enough people, 75% of voters are going to vote based on any one thing in that, that's really hard to say right now. There aren't any, you know, there was a time, those counting numbers, there were some automatic numbers that if you got to them, you definitely got to the Hall of Fame. I think we're at a stage now, partly because of the steroid era, partly because of the

influence of analytics, where some of those counting numbers don't count to what we once put on them, that I don't think there are so many. I don't think there are numbers where you can say absolutely yes, absolutely no. I think it ends up again being something where you have to look at each player individually. So coming from the perspective of you individually, I know you value the five-year gap in between a player retiring and becoming eligible for Hall of Fame voting.

Let's say, just for the sake of this exercise, though, that Chase Utley joined Roy Halladay and Mariano Rivera and some of these people as a first-year eligible player next year. What way do you, and this is without you probably having examined his case to the extent that you will, but what way do you lean just off the top of your head? Well, let me tell you this. What I do every year when I get the Hall of Fame ballot, and we'll get that at the end of this month, what I do every year is I divide the players on the ballot into three categories.

There's the guys who I'm absolutely certain are Hall of Famers, and some years there's none of those. There's never more who I'm absolutely certain are Hall of Famers. And some years there's none of those. There's never more than one or two of them. Some years there's none. Siren coming through. Hold on a second. But I divide them into

those. The players who there is absolutely no question. There's not many of those. The players who there is absolutely no question. There's not many of those. The players who there's no question that they're not going to make it because there's guys on the ballot who just obviously, to me, aren't Hall of Famers. I don't even really have to look at the numbers. I can eliminate them quickly. And then there's the group in the middle.

And what I do with that, first what I do is I look at the guys who I voted for the year before, who didn't get in, who are still on the ballot. I don't automatically put them on again. I examine them every year, look at those guys, and then I look at the other guys. Number one, is there anybody else of those other guys who I think deserves to be on it, whether it's someone who's new on the ballot or someone who I didn't vote for the year before, but I still think was a borderline guy that I want to take another look at.

And then I look, do I have 10 names? If I have fewer than 10 names, then it's easy because you just put those names on. If I have more than 10 names, then I have to decide who do I think is most deserving among those 10, because you're only allowed to vote for 10. For a lot of years, I didn't come close to 10. In recent years, partly because of the steroid issue that has kept guys on the ballot longer than they would have been otherwise, I've gotten several years to the last two years, I believe, I've gotten to 10. So what it ends up being is there's two determinations in the case of somebody like Udley, because he would be in the middle group.

He's not someone I would discard right away, and he's not someone I would put in right away. He's someone that I have to look at carefully. And what it would come down to with him is two different things. Number one, where do I put him on that? When I do look at that list carefully, where do I put him? Do I think that he is more likely to be a yes or more likely to be a no? And then if I'm at 10, where does he stand in relation to the players that I also believe should be in? So that's basically what I go through. And as I said, he would be, if you ask me right now, he's in that middle group where I wouldn't discard him.

I think he's got a chance, but I really would want to look at it carefully. Danny Nobler of Bleacher Report. Danny, you'll have five years to really get your mind wrapped around Chase Audley. We appreciate you joining us here on High Hopes. So Chase Audley, again, will not be eligible for the Hall of Fame until 2024. In that time, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, one way or another, will have exhausted their tenures on the ballot. So too will former Philly Kurt Schilling, who, in my mind,

is a Hall of Famer based on the production that he's had obviously other issues have come into play with his time on the ballot and and frankly I think there are a lot of people that are just misinformed about just how good Kurt Schilling is because he's not someone that by the traditional back of the baseball card stats would be a Hall of Famer but when you factor in postseason performance when you factor in a lot of the advanced numbers, it's not even really a debate that Curt Schilling statistically should probably be a Hall of Famer. Scott Rowland is another person that would get my vote.

He's in his second year on the ballot or will be in 2019. Billy Wagner's another former Philly with an interesting case as well. Now, Jim Tomey obviously got in last year. He went in as a Cleveland Indian. That was his first year on the ballot, and I'd be pretty surprised if Roy Halladay is in a first ballot Hall of Famer this year as well.

He'll go in as a Toronto Blue Jay whenever it is he does get in. It appears like a matter of when, not if, in terms of Halladay getting into the Hall of Fame. If Schilling ever gets into the Hall of Fame, he could be a Philly. He could also be an Arizona Dimebacker Boston Red Sox as well.

And that's a fun debate and will be a fun debate to have if he ever gets in. It's unclear if he ever will get in. He obviously spent the bulk of his time or the bulk of his peak in Philadelphia. I would say his absolute best years came in Arizona. He won a championship there, but you can make the case he was a little overshadowed by Randy Johnson, who's already a Hall of Famer. And then he helped end a curse in Boston, and he won two titles in his four years in Boston. So he's loved there, or at least he was as a player.

So he's someone that will be interesting if and when he does get in. Bobby Abreu probably has a better case than you would think. He'll become eligible in 2020. Abreu actually tops Vladimir Guerrero in terms of B-War, War 7, and Jaws. Abreu notably was not a good outfielder despite winning that one gold glove, which kind of shows you how accurate gold glove and defensive awards voting tends to be. With that said, Vladimir Guerrero was not a good outfielder by pretty much any stretch of the imagination.

The thing he had going for him, though, is he had one of the strongest arms in MLB history. So when people think about Vlad Guerrero, they think about his strong arm, when they think about him in the field. He also just kind of had a fun aspect about him. He mashed, he played, he was the last great expo. So he had a lot going for him, and he would hit balls off the dirt, he would hit one-handed home runs. So he had things going for him that Bobby Abreu will not,

but Bobby Abreu was just a great hitter, and he's someone who history will look back on him and view him as someone that was underappreciated, certainly in Philadelphia. Here's a few other names that are former Phillies that are going to be on the ballot in the next five years prior to Utley coming on the ballot. They had tremendous careers, some of them with the Phillies, some of them largely elsewhere. Roy Oswalt, Juan Pierre, who did spend a season with the Phillies, Michael Young, who

spent even less than a season with the Phillies, Shane Victorino primarily with the Phillies, and then Jason Wirth either primarily with the Phillies or primarily beating the Phillies, it felt like. Jason Wirth is another name that all these guys are going to be on the ballot. Perhaps some of them get the necessary 5% to stay on the ballot. I could see Michael Young or Roy Oswald getting more than 5% to stay on the ballot, but none of them really have a chance to ever gain induction. Now, two Phillies from the 2018 that were obviously teammates with Chase Utley were Jimmy Rollins and Ryan Howard.

Both of them will become eligible in 2022. As Danny Nobler noted, there was a time in Ryan Howard's career where he played at a Hall of Fame level. I mean, you can count on one hand the amount of people that have hit over 55 home runs without suspicion or credible linkage to some sort of performance-enhancing drug. So Ryan Howard did have that part of his career and there's nothing you take away from him. He won a rookie of the year

he won an MVP, he won a World Series he won an NLCS MVP he also came up a little bit late because of being blocked by Jim Tomey and after age 32 and this stat's courtesy of high heat stats it's a pretty incredible stat although it's probably not one people in Philadelphia love.

He came up late after Tomey, and then he had the worst B-War after age 32 in baseball history. My guess is Chris Davis may make a push for that, but for the time being, it kind of puts in perspective the type of career that Ryan Howard had after his 32nd birthday. So he's out. Jimmy Rollins, however, is going to have a case. Jason Stark wrote a tremendous article a few years back explaining how unique in baseball history Rollins was. My guess is he'll remain on the ballot all 10 years,

and being a likable guy that's still on TV, that certainly will not hurt his case. What does hurt his case is this comparison that often seems to be brought up between him and Barry Larkin. A lot of times people will ask me or I'll just be having a discussion about Jimmy Rollins Hall of Fame case or Phillies who could potentially get into the Hall of Fame in the near future. And they'll say, oh, well, Barry Larkin's in the Hall of Fame. So Jimmy Rollins has got to be right. And I guess this is just a product of barry larkin having played his entire career in

cincinnati rollins does top larkin in terms of career hits slightly but rollins had a career 264 batting average while larkins was 295 i don't think all-star games are a good way to judge a hall of fame candidacy because fans vote for it and it only takes into account a little more than half of the season. But Barry Larkin made 12 All-Star teams and Jimmy Rollins made three. So that's telling. And while they both won one NL MVP award, Rollins finished his career with a B-War of 46.3 compared to a 70.4 mark from Barry Larkin.

So Larkin trounced him there, and he also trounced Rollins in terms of Jaws, War 7, slugging percentage, and OPS+, a lot of the key marks Hall of Fame voters look at. Now, to me, Barry Larkin should have been a first ballot Hall of Famer and probably would have been if he didn't spend his entire career in Cincinnati. So there's a case to probably be made for Jimmy Rollins, but comparing him to Barry Larkin and saying, oh, well, if Barry Larkin's in Jimmy Rollins' house together, that's not the way to go about it. In any event, that's another topic for another time. Thanks to our guests, Jerry Krasnick and Danny Nobler for joining this week's show.

And thank you for tuning in. I'm Tim Kelly. You can follow me on Twitter at Tim Kelly Sports and like my Facebook page at the same spot. High Hopes can be followed on Twitter at High Hopes Pods as well. High Hopes Pod, excuse me, as well. Thank you guys for tuning in and I will catch you next time. All-Star Closer. Kenley Jansen, we have a question. What's the best podcast of all time? Baseball isn't boring, baby.

I'm Rob Bradford, and every single day I'm sitting down with the biggest names to show you this great game is the greatest game. It's my podcast. It's my passion. It's a cause I started more than two years ago. It is now the most prolific national daily baseball pod there is. Another fact. So jump aboard the B.I.B. Express. Follow and listen to Baseball Isn't Boring presented by Wasabi Hot Cloud Storage on the free Odyssey app or wherever you get your podcasts.