Register now to remove this ad

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 48

Thread: 2018 Hall of Fame Class

  1. #31
    With all the stats available to us now, someone who has never watched a game can do as good a job handing out the awards and honors as anyone.

  2. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    Papi won't get in then.
    He might not get in. The voters will have to decide if he really failed that test or if that info was incorrect. If he really failed the test, they should keep him out.

    But Ortiz's candidacy is an issue for several reasons--the DH thing too. To be sure, he won't make it in his first year of eligibility. He will be a controversial candidate.

    Manny might not even get enough support to make the ballot the second time. That's the key for me--getting these guys off the ballot ASAP so that we don't have to talk about it every year (I think that happened to R.Palmerio).

    Bonds and Clemons were always in that grey area because they were great players prior to juicing. In fact, they would both be in the HOF if they didn't cheat the game. Of course, take away steroids and Bonds doesn't turn into Babe Ruth at the age of 35 (and wouldn't be the all time HR leader) and Clemons would have fewer Cy Youngs, and so keeping them out is now the only acceptable course of action.
    Last edited by Fan_since_Boggs; 12-26-2017 at 03:35 PM.

  3. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by a700hitter View Post
    All Former players and managers should vote. No sportswriters and absolutely no geeks. People who played the game are in the best position to judge greatness.
    No, people who played the game are not in the best position to judge recipients of these awards. They are biased and vote largely based on reputation. Would they do a better job than sportswriters? Perhaps. But they would not do a better job than the geeks.

    Managers have voted on the Gold Gloves for ages, and that award is considered probably the largest joke of all the awards. Managers have gotten it very, very wrong. It is only recently that the Gold Gloves have gained an ounce of respectability, after they added the sabermetric component.

    The geeks would get it right, as is evidenced by the Fielding Bible Awards.

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    They are also a very biased source.
    !!!

  5. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    With all the stats available to us now, someone who has never watched a game can do as good a job handing out the awards and honors as anyone.
    They could do a better job. Guaranteed.

  6. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Carpin View Post
    I agree with you, but the problem is with the ones who were never caught or those who were very popular among the press will get in.

    For example Rickey Henderson & Mike Piazza were never caught and are already in the HOF, basically the "best cheater" will be rewarded. I agree that there are no solid reports of them linked to PED's but in the Henderson case he was with the A's when almost everybody in that clubhouse was using for me is very suspicious; and with Piazza you just need to see the numbers in his peak years and those were huge in a very demanding position during the PED rampage

    .
    Using this logic, Roger Maris was clearly using steroids despite many of them not being invented and all ofthem ccompletely absent from baseball during his career. ..

  7. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    No, people who played the game are not in the best position to judge recipients of these awards. They are biased and vote largely based on reputation. Would they do a better job than sportswriters? Perhaps. But they would not do a better job than the geeks.

    Managers have voted on the Gold Gloves for ages, and that award is considered probably the largest joke of all the awards. Managers have gotten it very, very wrong. It is only recently that the Gold Gloves have gained an ounce of respectability, after they added the sabermetric component.

    The geeks would get it right, as is evidenced by the Fielding Bible Awards.
    The argument for players and managers voting should have died completely when they awarded a Gold Glove to a player who spent the overwhelming majority of the season as a DH and played only 28 games in the field...

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    Isn't that what all the veteran's committee bullshit is? They went years and years without electing anyone. Back in the day, players just selected their buddies for the HOF.
    It is their club. They should decide. There need to be standards which I am pretty sure would be enforced. They don't want to dilute their own accomplishments. The veterans committee has been far from a free pass. Very few players have made it that way and some very deserving players have not made it -- like Gil Hodges imo.
    The King of TalkSox has Spoken.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
    [T]he conclusion to be drawn is that there is no practical value in seeking this ideal lineup, and in that case any way in which it might be meaningfully termed "best" is irrelevant, academic at best, pedantic at worst
    Quote Originally Posted by a700hitter View Post
    Unlike hot streaks and clutch, the “Cliff” is a myth. It can’t be defined, and it’s future existence cannot be proved.

  9. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    The argument for players and managers voting should have died completely when they awarded a Gold Glove to a player who spent the overwhelming majority of the season as a DH and played only 28 games in the field...
    current players and managers should not get a vote. Only HOF members should get a vote. They would not dilute their own accomplishments. That HOF next to their signatures carries a hefty $. Less players would make it if the HOF members voted, imo.
    The King of TalkSox has Spoken.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
    [T]he conclusion to be drawn is that there is no practical value in seeking this ideal lineup, and in that case any way in which it might be meaningfully termed "best" is irrelevant, academic at best, pedantic at worst
    Quote Originally Posted by a700hitter View Post
    Unlike hot streaks and clutch, the “Cliff” is a myth. It can’t be defined, and it’s future existence cannot be proved.

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by a700hitter View Post
    current players and managers should not get a vote. Only HOF members should get a vote. They would not dilute their own accomplishments. That HOF next to their signatures carries a hefty $. Less players would make it if the HOF members voted, imo.
    Isn't that essentially the Veteran's Committee? They almost never vote anyone in.

    Santo was elected by the Golden Era Committee or Golden Age Committee or something like that, and I'm not sure who's on that one. Electing Santo was the first thing thry did upon formation...
    Last edited by notin; 01-01-2018 at 04:41 PM.

  11. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by a700hitter View Post
    It is their club. They should decide. There need to be standards which I am pretty sure would be enforced. They don't want to dilute their own accomplishments. The veterans committee has been far from a free pass. Very few players have made it that way and some very deserving players have not made it -- like Gil Hodges imo.
    Arguably it's a museum and not really a club, although elected members do apparently feel different. I think it gets too personal at that point. Although I also think the BBWAA has made some really questionable selections as well.

    Not sure why the Hall itself can't handle the process internally...

  12. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by a700hitter View Post
    current players and managers should not get a vote. Only HOF members should get a vote. They would not dilute their own accomplishments. That HOF next to their signatures carries a hefty $. Less players would make it if the HOF members voted, imo.
    HOF members are the sole reason the worst of the worst got into the Hall in the first place. It was an old boys club that allowed their buddies to get in over far deserving players.
    "Let's go!" - Joseph Kelly Jr

  13. #43
    I can't recommend this book enough: https://www.amazon.com/Cooperstown-C.../dp/1250071216

    Even if you don't agree with who he wants selected, the first few chapters are invaluable to any discussion concerning how players have voted into the Hall.
    "Let's go!" - Joseph Kelly Jr

  14. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    HOF members are the sole reason the worst of the worst got into the Hall in the first place. It was an old boys club that allowed their buddies to get in over far deserving players.
    I disagree.
    The King of TalkSox has Spoken.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
    [T]he conclusion to be drawn is that there is no practical value in seeking this ideal lineup, and in that case any way in which it might be meaningfully termed "best" is irrelevant, academic at best, pedantic at worst
    Quote Originally Posted by a700hitter View Post
    Unlike hot streaks and clutch, the “Cliff” is a myth. It can’t be defined, and it’s future existence cannot be proved.

  15. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    HOF members are the sole reason the worst of the worst got into the Hall in the first place. It was an old boys club that allowed their buddies to get in over far deserving players.
    I can agree with that.

    They kept out Gil Hodges and Luis Tiant and Carl Mays but let in Bill Mazeroski and Dave Bancroft...
    Last edited by notin; 01-13-2018 at 09:32 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •