Topps Cards That Should Have Been: 2006 Mets

 

Last year I talked about the strangeness of a lot of the 2007 Mets' roster leftovers. Of course, there were even more of those types if you'd checked a year back for the 2006 stuff. While some of these are sort of sensible, there's still a lot of head-scratching choices, even for a team chasing a division title. 

We'll start with a cool, before-he-was-relevant Heath Bell, a few years before he'd become a relief standout for the Padres. Bell pitched in 22 games, had a 5.11 ERA and struck out 35. Already he was showing signs of his future big-game power, but in a much more jammed bullpen.

Also hanging out in the Mets bullpen that year, and also not produced by Topps, was Darren Oliver, 35 years old and still approaching peak relevancy with Texas. As for his Mets year, it was pretty alright- a 3.44 ERA and 60 Ks in 80 innings. Oliver was the 2nd-most-productive reliever in the pen, behind Aaron Heilman and was used mainly as a long relief man, as opposed to inning-long setup work. Still, after a season in the minors, Oliver's 2006 would show teams that he still had some stuff left, and he'd be a bullpen mainstay for another 7 years. 

And since we're still on the bullpen, how about 2000s relief icon Chad Bradford? Bradford had a Topps Total card in 2005, and some Upper Deck issues in 2008, but Topps would just stop making cards of Bradford, as it was too tiresome for them to produce cards of a sidearming, beloved relief piece. Anyway, Bradford's sole year in Queens produced his lowest ERA since his come-up in Oakland, with a 2.90 ERA year, plus 45 Ks in 70 games. Bradford joined Pedro Feliciano, Duaner Sanchez and Billy Wagner in providing a killer bullpen front for the Mets that year, before Bradford would be sent to Baltimore.

Longtime Braves and Royals outfielder Michael Tucker bopped around for a bit after leaving the Royals for the second time, ending up in places like San Francisco and Philly, before bowing out with the Mets in 06, at 35. In 35 games, he hit .196 with 11 hits and 6 RBIs, alongside average outfield numbers. He was a slightly intriguing backup choice, but didn't do much with the team at all. I will add, though, that Tucker was a postseason bench bat, and provided 2 hits and a steal against the St. Louis Cardinals in the NLCS. Even in his last-ever MLB games, Michael Tucker was a killer contact man.

I talked about this a few months ago when I discussed the 2006 Rockies, but 2006 was Eli Marrero's last season as well, and the former Cardinals backup catcher was still trying to make things work as a bench outfield bat. Though his Rockies numbers were okay, he'd still be trade, for Kaz Matsui of all people, and sent to the Mets. If Matsui was speedy, flexible, and defensively impressive, Marrero was...not that. He hit .182 in 25 Mets games, had just 6 hits, and was a modest-to-okay defender. By August he was off the team, and not even the Cardinals would let him keep his career alive. I do find it interesting that two other famous backup catchers, Kelly Stinnett and Mike Difelice, were utilized by the Mets that year. Certainly was the first non-Piazza Mets year since '97, wasn't it?

Ricky Ledee was in my 2007 Mets post, and he was with the team in 2006 as well, at age 32. Despite some decent numbers with the Dodgers during the first half, Ledee hit .094 with 3 hits in 32 at-bats, including only 1 RBI, a homer, with the Mets. Kinda shocked they kept him on for '07, honestly.

And finally...in 2006, it was Lima time in New York. After going from winning 13 games to losing 16 in the span of a season, Jose Lima was trying to hold onto his chaotic MLB energy, and signed with the Mets to keep starting games. In 4 starts, he had, well, 4 losses, 12 Ks and a 9.87 ERA. Not even his fan-favorite energy could save him there. After leaving the Mets, his desire to keep playing would lead him through the minors, and even to the Korean leagues, before meeting a sad end due to a cardiac arrhythmia. 

I'll try to keep throwing up extra customs these days, I've still got a bunch left over. 

My Unofficial 2022 Baseball Hall of Fame Ballot

 As discussed, last year I didn't wanna make one of these. This year, it's practically inevitable.

As the ballot fills up with more and more people who are either steroid abusers or just too wholly unspectacular to be Hall of Famers to me, it becomes harder to really craft a good selection of players, even if this post doesn't actually mean anything. And if I were to go for all 10, which I honestly doubt that I will, I'd be reaching on more than half. Next year we at least have the promise of an interesting conversation with Carlos Beltran, with a great career whose last section is tainted by cheating as a member of the Astros, and the 2024 ballot is CHOCK FULL of interesting Hall of Fame cases, including but not limited to Joe Mauer, Matt Holliday, David Wright, Jose Bautista, Adrian Gonzalez, Chase Utley and...sweet, sweet Bartolo Colon.

But until then. A lot of reaching. A lot of 'why not him'. And a year where three people who took steroids might sneak into the Hall of Fame. Because...who the hell opposes them?

As per usual, this post is my selections for a HOF ballot if I was given the opportunity to make one. Like the regular ballot, I'm allowed up to ten selections, I don't think the max is gonna be a problem this year. And I'll briefly explain my case for these guys, and whether they actually have any chance of getting in.

Bobby Abreu:

My hope is that a Hall of Fame case eventually grows for Bobby, even though this is pretty much a vanity pick for me, but...at his peak, Abreu was legit. Every season from 1998 to 2004, Bobby Abreu had a WAR of 5 and above. Add 2005 and 2006 and every one of those seasons has a batting runs value of 23 or above. Also in that 1998 to 2004 stretch, his average fell below .300 only once. Bobby Abreu is the type of powerful contact hitter with speed and versatility that the Hall of Fame is rewarding in their veterans division, with people like Tony Oliva and Minnie Minoso getting in. I do put Abreu into that category, I think he was a pure hitter who was among the best in the league for a little over a decade, and whose offensive prowess was the key for teams like the 2000s Phils and Yankees. I don't know if he'll actually get in until a lot of bigger cases come off the board, but I'll keep putting him on here.

Team of Induction: Philadelphia Phillies

Odds of 2022 Induction: 30 to 1

Odds of Eventual Induction: 9 to 1

Todd Helton:

Larry Walker coming off the ballot has done a ton of good for his former battery partner Todd Helton. In the past two seasons, Helton's percentages on the ballot have grown, from 29.2 percent when Walker was inducted to 44.9% last year. Currently, Helton is polling at 57.8, and that's with about half the ballots in. There is a chance he breaks 60% this year, and pretty much everyone who's done that recently, except for Curt Schilling, has gotten in. So it's looking like Helton might still be two or three years away from Cooperstown, but it's looking like people are recognizing that Helton belongs there. I would call Helton one of the top hitters of his era, and one of the best offensive performers of the 2000s, with a .331 average, 260 homers, 981 RBIs and 1756 hits in that era. Helton was also one of the most consistent players of that era, only having one injury-plagued year in the 2000s, before being sidelined a bit in his last few seasons. Like Abreu, it comes down to a specific run of years- Helton's run from 2000 to 2004 results in 5 straight ASG nods, 5 straight seasons with an OPS over 1, 4 consecutive 100-RBI years, and 5 consecutive 30-homer years [six if you add 1999]. If Walker is in, Todd Helton needs to be in too.

Team of Induction: Colorado Rockies

Odds of 2022 Induction: 12 to 1

Odds of Eventual Induction: 5 to 1

David Ortiz:

I explained a lot of this in my steroids post from last week, but I'll restate most of it. David Ortiz is going to be inducted mostly because of his status as a symbol for Boston sports. The man won three rings, hit over 500 homers, made 10 All Star teams, won a Home Run Derby, only had one injury-marred campaign with the Sox, and kept producing consistently until he was 40. He may also have one of the most impressive final seasons of any recent Hall of Famer, steroids or no steroids. Yes, the allegations are pretty legit-sounding, and I do think Ortiz may have juiced in some way, but...it's all too nebulous to really make a judgment call on, a lot like Mike Piazza, who avoided steroid allegations a few years ago. I will add, though, that the only reason a lot of writers have a clear conscience in voting for Ortiz is that about 6 years ago, the commissioner of baseball essentially pardoned him. I forget the guy's name, something Manfred or somebody, big prick who hates baseball, but his vindication of Ortiz is why there hasn't been the usual anti-steroid lag in his cases [like what A-Rod's going through]. Regardless, I think Ortiz has the career for it, and is a classic-type sports hero that deserves to be in.

Team of Induction: Boston Red Sox

Odds of 2022 Induction: 5 to 4

Odds of Eventual Induction: Even

Scott Rolen:

Scott Rolen has become my new Edgar Martinez. Not Omar Vizquel, I'm done voting for him after last year's abuse allegations. Rolen. He's the new long-termer dark horse on the ballot. And like Edgar, I think the support needs to coagulate. I always thought the numbers were there for Rolen- some amazing defensive numbers with Philly and St. Louis, production into his late 30s with Cincinnati, and a tremendous pair of playoff runs in 2004 and 2006. Rolen was never a marquee name, but he was always a player that your roster felt incomplete without, an argument we're gonna hear for Adrian Beltre in two years. Rolen has 5 100+ RBI seasons, 7 25+ home run seasons, 7 ASG nods, including 2 past the age of 35, and had that stellar 2004 with the full, five-tool range all around. I think that Rolen has a chance to sneak in this year if the rest of the ballots come his way, but if not, I think he'll DEFINITELY get in next year, as he'll be one of the top vote-getters still on the ballot.

Team of Induction: St. Louis Cardinals

Odds of 2022 Induction: 4 to 1

Odds of Eventual Induction: 2 to 1

Jimmy Rollins:

Another vanity pick, but I wasn't gonna NOT vote for one of my favorite players once he got on the ballot. The 2008 Phils core is slowly showing up here, as Ruiz will be on the ballot next year, and in 2024 we'll get Utley and Werth. This year we even have Ryan Howard on the ballot, and while I'm not voting for him because he burned out way too quickly, I am gonna slide a vote Jimmy Rollins' way because I do think that he was one of the best shortstops in the league in the 2000s. The AL had Jeter, the NL much had Jimmy Rollins. Rollins was another great contact hitter with a huge MVP season in 2007, a big effort for the WS runs in 2008 and 2009, some breakout energy in the early 2000s with ASG runs, and 470 stolen bases, which is a pretty nice stat. Rollins was the backbone of the Phillies from 2001 until 2014, and was a hero to many. I don't know if the rest of the writers' association will think he's a HOFer, but I think it'd be pretty awesome if he made it. Maybe a few years away, but...it's possible.

Team of Induction: Philadelphia Phillies

Odds of 2022 Induction: 20 to 1

Odds of Eventual Induction: 14 to 1

Billy Wagner:

This year, we're going to see Jonathan Papelbon and Joe Nathan leave the ballot on their first year on. We've already seen Trevor Hoffman, Lee Smith and Mariano Rivera get into the Hall recently. I have no idea who is going to be the next closing pitcher to be inducted after Mo. Francisco Rodriguez? Craig Kimbrel when he retires? There aren't a lot of sure bets like there were at one point. Maybe the only stellar, consistent closing weapon we have left on there is Billy Wagner. Once again talking about the 2000s, Billy Wagner was a factor in his team's closing schematic every year from 2001 until 2008. In that period he had 35 or more saves five times. He finished a season with 100 strikeouts on four occasions, including his final season with Atlanta, where he was 38, and made an All-Star team. Though he was a bit of an ass, he isn't as much of an ass as some other people on this ballot [Schilling, Kent, Papelbon], and was a standard for closing pitching for about 15 years. I think that if Hoffman and Rivera are in, Wagner should get in too. 

Team of Induction: Houston Astros

Odds of 2022 Induction: 17 to 1

Odds of Eventual Induction: 8 to 1

So, that's what we're working with. I think Bonds, Clemens and Ortiz are going in. I can hope for somebody like Rolen to sneak in with them, but the 2022 Hall of Fame class is meant to just brush all the ugliness off the table, for better or for worse. 

Topps Cards That Should Have Been: 2022 Hall of Fame Class Edition

 

Like last year, we celebrate the impending Baseball Hall of Fame inductions with a run through the uniforms that should have been depicted on cards, regardless of how brief or perfunctory they were.

I should have included this in last year's bunch, but in 2014, Bobby Abreu signed a minor league deal with the team that made him a household name, the Philadelphia Phillies. The majority of his supremely underrated Hall of Fame case came from his Phils days, and having him back, even at the end of his career, was a cool move. Though Abreu spent the Spring with the Phils in Clearwater, he did not make the team, and would eventually sign a deal with the Mets, which would go surprisingly better for him rounding out his career. Still...wouldn't it have been awesome to see one more Phils Abreu card? It would have felt the same as 2012 Topps' Jim Thome Phils card.

Zipping us back to the top with the new additions to the ballot, most of whom may not make more than 5% admittedly, while I already made a 2005 Topps card of Prince Fielder back in November, I did not make one to commemorate his 2004 Spring Training sting. While Fielder was still a year or so away, he did have some solid numbers out of camp for the Brewers, but he was still blocked behind Lyle Overbay for another year. He'd eventually own first base and become a fixture to round out the decade.

Justin Morneau's 2004 issue would have been more crucial, as Morneau would be an important part of the Twins' infield that year, playing 74 games, hitting .271 with 19 homers in that time. Unfortunately, Morneau would only get cards from Topps in Heritage and Total, skipping flagship altogether. A bit of an odd exclusion, given his appearances in 2003 and 2005 sets. Nevertheless, from 2005 on, Morneau would be a strong, consistent piece of the mid-2000s Twins teams, culminating in a 2006 MVP win that I'm still kinda bitter about.

While Jonathan Papelbon's rookie card was in 2006 Topps, he was used out of the pen during 17 games in 2005, and did fairly well, with a 2.65 ERA and 34 Ks. Of course, the very next season Papelbon would get the ninth inning and become a hero in Boston. Before...y'know...pissing off Philly and Washington.

In 2016, Joe Nathan was coming off a disappointing campaign in Detroit, and after amassing all star nominations as a Twin and Ranger, was coming down big time. Midway through the season he signed a deal with the Cubs, as they embarked on their championship campaign. He only pitched in 3 games for Chicago, but struck out 4 and gave up no runs. The Cubs did release Nathan shortly afterwards, and he wasn't finished. 

So he decided to return to San Francisco, where he'd spent his early career. As a Giant, in September, Nathan pitched in 7 games, struck out 5 out of 18 batters, and continued his scoreless streak. He ended the season with a 0.00 ERA, which was strong enough numbers to go out on. While I doubt Nathan will get into the HOF, he was still an excellent closer and relief asset, and still had some stuff left in the tank even at the end.

And finally, we come to Jimmy Rollins as a White Sox. After his Dodgers deal went disappointingly, Rollins' stock declined, and could only muster a minor league deal with the tanking ChiSox. The best you can say for J-Rol here is that he was an impressive prelude to Tim Anderson, hitting .221 with 33 hits and 8 RBIs in 41 games. Once Anderson was called up, there was really no reason for Rollins to be on the roster, and he was quietly released, tying up his 17 year career there. Of all the newbies on the ballot, I have the highest of hopes that Rollins can someday make it to the Hall of Fame, even as unlikely as that seems. He was always a favorite, and always seemed to be an elite shortstop.

Tomorrow...I am actually gonna do an Unofficial HOF Ballot post. It's gonna be...something, alright.

What Happens if Bonds and Clemens Get In

 Last year was the first year since the inception of the blog that I didn't do a Hall of Fame ballot post. 

There were two reasons behind it. One was that I had a feeling that nobody would be getting in, as the ballot-tracker spreadsheet was already tracking people at 60s at the very highest. The second reason was that there was a large probability that some of the steroids guys would make it in, and I wasn't sure how I felt about that.

In case I haven't talked about it much on here- I don't collect players that took steroids. As a hypocrite, I've made the occasional exception, like Andy Pettitte, who took them to get over an injury and has expressed regret about it, or David Ortiz, who did enough in the wake of the non-Mitchell-report HGH claims to gain a lot of headway, as well as becoming an important sports figure that seems to even forgive a major scandal, sort of like Brett Favre or Ray Lewis. And I'll go into more detail about it when I do a ballot for the blog, but Ortiz still gets my vote. Because of the timing, his career outweighs the steroids push. Which I can't say for Clemens or Bonds, or even Robinson Cano or Alex Rodriguez, people who I rooted for that played with HGHs. 

So, I've had to even stop collecting people like A-Rod, or Jason Giambi, or Marlon Byrd, people who did enough for my team to enjoy them but eventually became more steroid than player. And that's really where I'm at with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens.

Let's do the math right now. Barry Bonds started working with the BALCO trainer in 2000, so I would say that anything from 1986 to 1999 is fair game. In that time he has 445 home runs, 460 stolen bases, hits .288, has 2010 hits, and has a career WAR of 103.7, which is already great career numbers. Roger Clemens started working for his steroid-supplying trainer in 1998, so anything from 1984 to 1997 is fair game. In that time he has 213 wins, a career 2.97 ERA, 2882 strikeouts, a 1.147 WHIP, and a career 92.7 WAR, similarly excellent. 

If Bonds stops playing after 1999 and Clemens stops playing after 1997, I have a clear conscience, they both go in easily, they deserve accolades as ambassadors to the sport. But the fact that they weren't satisfied with everything they had already achieved, including 3 Cy Youngs and an MVP for Clemens and 3 MVPs for Bonds, irks me. 

I did a research paper on steroids in eighth grade, and I talked with Howard Bryant, who literally wrote the book on the subject, and who my dad knew well from college. While admittedly my interview skills were not up to snuff at that age [that was around the time I started writing the blog], I got the sense from his book that giving respect to these players was entirely counterintuitive. Bryant knows the strength of a great black role model in sports, he's written books on Hank Aaron, and one of his chief subjects is the race discrepancy in sports, especially baseball. So the fact that the man who dedicated several years to a work about why Hank Aaron was great also dedicated even more to a work about why Roger Clemens, Jose Canseco, Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire were indefensible...stuck with me. 

Bryant was preparing for a world in which the right choice for many sportswriters would be to enshrine Clemens, Bonds and Rodriguez anyway, and talk about their high points while sweeping their 'cheating' under the rug. In 2013, the first year Bonds, Sosa and Clemens went on the ballot, Bryant handed in a blank Hall of Fame ballot. No names. Not even admirable choices like Craig Biggio, Mike Piazza, or even Lee Smith, Tim Raines or Edgar Martinez, would be on his ballot. And that year, no one got in. It was a habit that Bryant would go back to on a few more occasions. He wasn't doing this, in my opinion, for attention from the public. He was trying to get the attention of his fellow sportswriters. Basically saying 'if you give them glory, you'll be encouraging people to forget about steroids'. 

Howard Bryant's main thesis is that these players deserve to be remembered, but not for the awards and the records. For breaking the rules. They shouldn't be legends, they should be cautionary tales. And already, a lot of these people, like Jose Canseco, Lenny Dykstra and Ken Caminiti, have become that. 

And so here we are. 2022. The last year that Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa or Roger Clemens can get into the Baseball Hall of Fame before a veterans vote inevitably gets them in anyway. It is looking very likely that Bonds and Clemens will get in, primarily for their pre-steroid numbers, but also for their 2000s numbers, record breaking and the like. 

So what happens then? I collect the Hall of Famers, I have a binder full of contemporary releases of HOF players. I try to collect everybody, even the obscure ones, and even the ones I didn't love getting in, like Harold Baines and Ted Simmons. I'm already telling myself that I won't collect Jim Kaat, solely because I don't agree that he should be in, and also I'm not ready to forgive him for that racism on the air against Ohtani. And so if Bonds and Clemens get in...I'm not gonna find all my Bonds and Clemens cards and re-add them to my HOF binder. I just don't see the point of rewarding that, or wasting binder space for them.

If anything, it'll mean that these players' market stock will rise, and that it'll be easier to deal away some of the higher-price cards I have of them, once I eventually figure out how to properly do eBay. But this July, there will still be a ceremony in Cooperstown that rewards these players, and the gift shop will sell Bonds and Clemens merchandise along with Minnie Minoso and Tony Oliva stuff, and...it won't sit right for me.

I can't change the system. The system rewards baseball greatness regardless of moral obligation [no word on Joe Jackson or Pete Rose, though]. The system rewards not the people who break the rules, but the people who are talented enough to get away with it. 

So if I can't change that, I guess I'll just have to change how I think about it. 

Fanaticized

 

I didn't post about the MLBPA license acquisition by Fanatics last fall because I wasn't quite sure how I felt about it, and therefore what to say about it. Part of it was, for the first time ever as a collector, I wasn't sure what the future held for the hobby.

I started collecting in 2007, as I've discussed, and I knew full well how far the hobby had come. I'd gone through my dad's collection, watching Topps' 70s and 80s run be eventually joined by Fleer, Donruss and Upper Deck, I traced the overproduction boom in the 90s to the premium, multi-tier collecting market in the mid-2000s, and I enjoyed having the selection of Topps and Upper Deck products. Then, in 2010, I saw Topps become the top dog, and promptly go on auto-pilot, once UD would lose their license. Some things in the last decade I didn't see coming, like Panini's more creative ideas without a license, or the total collapse of the retail market in 2020 thanks to stir-crazy prospectors, but I could always point to what I knew, or what was constant.

And as it stood with the license acquisition, after 2022 there wasn't going to be anything constant. Which I had problems with.

I...don't think I've ever talked about this on here, but I've spent most of my life living with autism, and taking in the therapies and behavioral ideas in order to fit in with everyone else. One of the things I've always had troubles with is changes in routine. If something has been one way for as long as I can remember and just suddenly changes without much leeway, I had troubles with that. I point to whenever a website I use often changes its interface, or when a process I've been relying on for some time changes or ends and I have to pick up something new. And I'm working on my response to this, and I always manage, but...it's difficult. 

I will say, though, that one of the few times change excites me is when it's tied to collecting. When I get to see cards of people in new uniforms, especially if they're only known to me in one primary uniform, it's insanely cool. Or seeing the first few cards of a new product. That's something I've always enjoyed. 

The point is that all my life, I've had Topps releases every year, things to look forward to with that. And with the Fanatics licensing acquisition, I wasn't sure what would be waiting for me on shelves. The silver lining is that Fanatics would improve distribution, as evidenced by their merch sales, but what would Fanatics Baseball be? What would the cards look like? What idea men would be on that? Would it in any way resemble the feeling of opening Topps cards? And I say this as someone who's been very critical of Topps ever since having the universal license. Yes, Topps has made some mistakes, but I'd still be sad if they weren't producing cards. 

Which is why yesterday's news, that Fanatics would be buying Topps, its facilities and its employees, as a total absorption of the brand and the company, came as something of a relief.

I mean, yes, any sort of corporate takeover is bad. Corporations becoming too big and too powerful is something that's already spelled doom for the film industry, and I have opinions on the weight of corporations vs. the weight of the average worker that I'm clearly not gonna get into here for fear of alienating even more of the fanbase [hey, remember the guy who called me a shit writer during the month where I was afraid I wouldn't be making any more customs?]. It's kinda similar to the Rob Manfred conundrum, with the big people with money having too much leverage over the players. 

But...Topps has enough people on the inside who know what they're doing. Enough products, like Stadium Club, Heritage, Big League and Archives, prove that there's some level of creativity, knowledge of past successes, and design smarts. And hopefully with the collaboration with Fanatics's main idea men, there will be some modicum of collaboration and improving current concepts. Fanatics can use Topps' people to figure out how to make good baseball products, Topps can use Fanatics' people to make better new ideas and to get products in hands faster. 

The other bit of this that people have rightfully gotten excited over is the return of the football and basketball licenses to Topps, and the potential return of Topps Football and Topps Basketball. As flawed as both licenses became in Topps' hands, they have the potential to try again in a more lucrative card market. As sad as it was that Topps didn't get to produce rookies of Pat Mahomes, Joe Burrow and Devonta Smith, imagine the big rookies yet to come that Topps will be able to make cards of. 

There is obviously the potential for drawbacks. The continued lack of a licensed competitor could make for even more diminishing returns. There could be a lot more of the same behaviors, like the continued stagnation of printing deadlines, pushing back product release dates, and harebrained creative decisions. The only thing this acquisition could change is just who holds the money bag. 

And there's always the lingering question of 'what kind of collector will Fanatics be marketing to?' This is still a hobby ruled by eBay flippers and mojo sellers who use cards like cryptocurrency. And while I do think there is merit in selling big money cards [I need to figure out eBay, I have a ton of stuff I could make good money off of], it can't be the whole hobby. Topps, and Fanatics, needs to remember the collectors who are just team collectors, or player collectors, or, if you're me, even more specific types of collecting. 

I sincerely hope that this acquisition deal leads to a long and prosperous run, that revitalizes the hobby, levels things back to equilibrium, and makes a majority of collectors happy. I know there's not a high probability of that happening, but it's nice to dream.