Hall of Fame

[Sean Carlisle]

Roger Marris is not in the Hall of Fame although his acheivements including numerous mvp's and the single season hr record that stood forabout 40 years ingrain him inAmerican culture and folklore. Pete Roseis being penalized and persecuted for something he did wrong but it was after his playing career.Meanwhile I hearsome dubious non white players are on the ballot and are expected to get voted in on the first try. I image the beloved Bonds when he decides to retirewill have no problem getting in despite the performance enhancing substances issues.

 

[GWTJ]

Only Bond's and Sosa will be able to dodge the steroid scandal when induction time comes. Palmiero will not make the HOF and McGwire will struggle to make it.

 

[Baseball Fan]

Bert Blyeven is another name that never gets menitoned. Yet he's won a World Series, I think he has a Cy Young and has won over 200 games why is his name not mentioned. Sure he was on some awful teams, but I'm shocked as to why he is not in.


Yes Wonderful names like Dwight Gooden, Daryl Strawberry and of course model citizen Albert Belle. Should be fun

 

[Don Wassall]

Blyleven won 287 games and is one of the top strikeout pitchers ever. He should be in the Hall.


Two other pitchers with high win totals whowere ignored by the votersare Tommy John (288 wins) and Jim Kaat (283). Kaat may have been the best fielding pitcher ever along with Greg Maddux.


280 career wins is a lot more difficult to achieve than 500 homeruns, but John and Kaat will never makethe Hall of Fame. If Blyleven makes it, it'll come through the Veterans Committee down the road, which I think should have been abolished many years ago.

 

[foreverfree]

Soooo, will Bruce Sutter be merely taking up space in Cooperstown, or is his enshrinement deserved? I'm surprised his election (indeed, his name) hasn't been mentioned yet on CF.

John

 

[Don Wassall]

I think Sutter is deserving, but Goose Gossage is evenmore deserving of being in the Hall of Fame. It would have been great if they both went in together this year instead of just Sutter.

 

[Gary]

I have been following baseball for a long time-These men in my opinion belong in the Hall of Fame. Pete Rose, Rich Gossage, Bruce Sutter, Bert Blyleven, Roger Maris, Steve Garvey, Don Mattingly and Dale Murphy.

 

[jaxvid]

I have been following baseball for a long time-These men in my opinion belong in the Hall of Fame. Pete Rose, Rich Gossage, Bruce Sutter, Bert Blyleven, Roger Maris, Steve Garvey, Don Mattingly and Dale Murphy.

I agree completely Gary. I used to be ambivalent about Maris (missed too much time with injuries) but after all of the hoopla surrounding single season home run records the guy who held the record the longest should be in there. Hey, if Tinker, Evers and Chance can be in there just because of a song why not Roger?

They all would be in the Hall if their names were:

Dre' Bly leven
Marcus Garvey
Diego Mattingly
Dante' Murphy
and Pete Rose was accused of pimping, not gambling.


The other guys are slam dunks. All dominating players of their eras. All of their non-white contemporaries are in so why not them?

 

[bigunreal]

I have to disagree with most of the players mentioned being Hall of
Fame candidates. First, I think that far too many less than stellar
players have been inducted into the Hall, especially in recent years.
When you are putting guys like Orlando Cepeda and Tony Perez in, then
you open the door to a whole boatload of solid (but far less than
great) players in every generation. Roger Maris had one great home run
season, and one other very good one. Other than that, his numbers were
nothing special. I think his lifetime average was only .260 or so.
That's a ridiculous number for a Hall of Famer. The same could
definitely be said of Harmon Killebrew, who was a terrible fielder,
couldn't run, and had a lifetime average of about .259. The selection
of Bruce Sutter is absurd. If I'm not mistaken, he lost more games than
he won in his career. I don't care how many saves he had, you just
can't put someone with a lifetime losing record into the HOF. But then
again, I have a strong prejudice against relief pitchers in general,
and probably wouldn't support any of them being inducted into the Hall.
As for Pete Rose, he is the one player above all who should be
inducted. Until baseball's all-time hits leader (as well as runs scored
and at-bats, if memory serves me well) is enshrined in the Hall of
Fame, no one else should get in.

 

[foreverfree]

I have to disagree with most of the players mentioned being Hall of
Fame candidates. First, I think that far too many less than stellar
players have been inducted into the Hall, especially in recent years.
When you are putting guys like Orlando Cepeda and Tony Perez in, then
you open the door to a whole boatload of solid (but far less than
great) players in every generation.

This isn't new. According to Bill James's 1994 book *The Politics of Glory: How Baseball's Hall of Fame Really Works*, that standard was done away with around 1945-46, when 21 HOFers, almost all of them from the 19th/early 20th century went in in that 2 year period, with a minimum of homework done other than relying on old sportswriters' remininscings (sp). (James's book disagrees with you on Cepeda btw.)

Roger Maris had one great home run
season, and one other very good one. Other than that, his numbers were
nothing special. I think his lifetime average was only .260 or so.

As for MVPs, I think Maris won 2, 1960 and 1961, one short of the then-record.

The selection
of Bruce Sutter is absurd.

Well, he's in, and I read in my local paper today that he's going in as a Cardinal. Why not as a Cub, I don't know. I associate him with the Northsiders, no one else.

But then
again, I have a strong prejudice against relief pitchers in general,

Why?

As for Pete Rose, he is the one player above all who should be
inducted. Until baseball's all-time hits leader (as well as runs scored
and at-bats, if memory serves me well) is enshrined in the Hall of
Fame, no one else should get in. 

Well, I don't know if I would be that extreme, but I was surprised to see Pete's uniform and a bit of other Rose memorabilia when I visited the Hall 3 months ago (the third time I've been there [1972 and 1992]). Pete's probably suffered enough. Time to lift the ban, Bud.

John

 

[Gary]

If Cool Papa Bell, Josh Gibson and Judy Johnson can get into the Hall of Fame because they were black's who played in a bush league and never faced big league White pitchers then the men I mentioned also belong in the Hall of Fame. Larry Doby goes in then Roger Maris should also go in and if Kirby Puckett goes in-You have got to put in the greatest Twins player of all-time Harmon Killebrew. If O.J Simpson can murder two people in cold blood and stay in the Football Hame of Fame. Why not Pete Rose in the Baseball Hall of Fame!!

 

[jaxvid]

I think his lifetime average was only .260 or so. That's a ridiculous number for a Hall of Famer. The same could definitely be said of Harmon Killebrew, who was a terrible fielder, couldn't run, and had a lifetime average of about .259.

Dude get real! The "Killer" hit 500 homeruns in a career that spanned the toughest hitting era in modern baseball. He would have hit about 700 playing today. No way a 500 HR guy is not in the Hall.

You mentioned Sutter had more losses then wins, typical of relief pitchers as they inherit a lot of baserunners. Your disdain for relievers is hard to fathom. They can save over 50% of their teams wins sometimes, that is extremely valuable to a club. A shut down relief pitcher is more valuable then a 20 game winner.

 

[bigunreal]

The glorification of relief pitchers (or "closers," as they are now
commonly known) is one of the many things about modern baseball that
made me lose interest in it. I am a baseball traditionalist; I think
pitchers ought to be able to throw complete games. I don't believe
anyone can be considered "great" who plays no more than one or two
innings, not even every game. For the same reasons, I don't respect
designated hitters, or believe that any player who was primarily a
designated hitter during his career should be inducted into the Hall of
Fame. This is also the reason I object to the induction of a guy like
Killebrew; he was an absolute disaster as a fielder, wherever he
played. He also struck out all the time, and had a mediocre batting
average. Yes, he hit a lot of home runs, but I think that home
runs in and of themselves are not that important. If we pay so much
attention to a threshold like 500 HRs, then we have to induct the truly
mediocre guys like Fred McGriff. Is he a Hall of Famer? Heck, Dave
Kingman almost ended up with 500 HRs. What was his lifetime average-
something like .240?



I think the Hall of Fame should be reserved for the truly great. Yes,
it was totally ridiculous to induct all the Negro League players, or
guys like Larry Doby, but this is not really a racial issue. There is a
lot of pressure every year to induct SOMEONE. My contention is that
there are very, very few players who've played in the past 50 years who
are true Hall of Famers. If you are going to induct a bunch of players
who have lifetime averages of .280 or .290, but who played long enough
to collect the magic 500 HRs or 3000 hits, then where do you enshrine
Babe Ruth, or Ty Cobb? If they just can't stop themselves from
inducting people, maybe they should come up with some kind of "Super"
wing at the Hall of Fame, for people like Ruth, Cobb, Walter Johnson,
Rogers Hornsby, Honus Wagner, etc.

 

[jaxvid]

bigunreal, I see your point. We are just looking at it two different ways. Since there is no criteria for Hall of fame membership people will decide their own. I know a few guys that are like you and would put the bar very high, but that's part of the fun, debating who really deserved it. Think about it, Cobb and Ruth were not unanamously selected, what were those sportwriters thinking??? Anyway I would like to see as many white guys get in now before the hispanic stars start getting voted in.

 

[foreverfree]

The glorification of relief pitchers (or "closers," as they are now
commonly known) is one of the many things about modern baseball that
made me lose interest in it. I am a baseball traditionalist; I think
pitchers ought to be able to throw complete games. I don't believe
anyone can be considered "great" who plays no more than one or two
innings, not even every game. For the same reasons, I don't respect
designated hitters, or believe that any player who was primarily a
designated hitter during his career should be inducted into the Hall of
Fame. This is also the reason I object to the induction of a guy like
Killebrew; he was an absolute disaster as a fielder, wherever he
played. He also struck out all the time, and had a mediocre batting
average. Yes,  he hit a lot of home runs, but I think that home
runs in and of themselves are not that important. If we pay so much
attention to a threshold like 500 HRs, then we have to induct the truly
mediocre guys like Fred McGriff. Is he a Hall of Famer? Heck, Dave
Kingman almost ended up with 500 HRs. What was his lifetime average-
something like .240?

I think the Hall of Fame should be reserved for the truly great. Yes,
it was totally ridiculous to induct all the Negro League players, or
guys like Larry Doby, but this is not really a racial issue. There is a
lot of pressure every year to induct SOMEONE. My contention is that
there are very, very few players who've played in the past 50 years who
are true Hall of Famers. If you are going to induct a bunch of players
who have lifetime averages of .280 or .290, but who played long enough
to collect the magic 500 HRs or 3000 hits, then where do you enshrine
Babe Ruth, or Ty Cobb? If they just can't stop themselves from
inducting people, maybe they should come up with some kind of "Super"
wing at the Hall of Fame, for people like Ruth, Cobb, Walter Johnson,
Rogers Hornsby, Honus Wagner, etc.

Well, if they play baseball in the great beyond, bigunreal, hope and pray that you don't have to hit against Frank Edwin McGraw. Tugger just might serve you chin music, not scroogies, even inside the pearly gates.

I missed out on most of Killebrew's career and grew up in a National League (since 1955 when the A's left) market (Philadelphia) so I won't comment on Killebrew's fielding. I do wish to see more CG's and the end of the DH myself. And yes, jaxvid, what were the handful of writers that snubbed the Bambino thinking?

John

 

[sunshine]

The baseball writers who did not vote for the likes of Goose Gossage and Jim Rice are complete IDIOTS. Sutter is a nice pick but who is kidding who. Gossage belongs in the HOF and anyone who knows baseball should realize that. I also lean to putting Maris and Mattingly in. Murphy and Garvey not so sure but they should be discussed at least. Like Gossage can't figure why rice isn't in either. These people can not think logically. They look at stats and longevity which are importnant but not the only barometers.

 

[bigunreal]

Jim Rice epitomizes the kind of good, solid ballplayer who should not
be inducted into the Hall of Fame. In recent years, this type of player
has been inducted with increasing frequency, to the detriment of the
Hall, imho. Orlando Cepeda, Tony Perez, Joe Morgan, Ryan Sandberg, Jim
Bunning, Ozzie Smith, and too many others to mention just aren't
"great" in the same way the true immortals of the game were great. Don
Mattingly would have been worthy, if he'd been able to produce at a
great level for more than 5 years or so. Roger Maris had one very
memorable season, and broke a very cherished record, but other than
that, he wasn't even at the level of a Rice or Perez, career-wise. I
think there ought to be some basic ground rules for admission to the
Hall of Fame; for all field positions except catcher (and
possibly shortstop), you ought to be at least a .300 lifetime hitter.
For pitchers, you should at least have had 5 20-win seasons. I know
this will never be done, because the jock-sniffers in the media can't
wait to honor their heroes every year, but I believe that Hall of Fame
membership is almost at the same crisis level as immigration. In both
cases, we ought to have a moratorium. Until if and when Major League
Baseball starts producing great players again, I would be perfectly
content to admit no new members to the Hall of Fame.

 

[Don Wassall]

Letting too many marginal players into the Hall is why I've been opposed to the Veterans Committee and think it should have been abolished long ago. The Veterans Committe was established originally to find deserving players from the late 19th century and early part of the 20th century who were overlooked, as the Hall itself did not open and begin electing players until the mid-'30s.


The Veterans Committee did its job, but did not disbandas it should have after selecting the players it set out to do (seemingly no bureaucracies and "committees" ever go out of business in the U.S.). Thus it morphed into a permanent, "feel good" kind of thing that selected all kinds of Negro League players, umpires and executives, and now serves as a second chance for players who were not selected by the baseball writers during their 15 years of eligibility. Many of the writersfrom the early years of baseball were no longer around to judge the Hall of Fame credentials of the players they covered; now, every player is judged for 15 years by their journalist peers so there is no need whatsoever for the Veterans Committee and hasn't been for decades.


Of the players who have been talked about in this thread, I think Gossage, Blyleven and Rose should be in. Sutter's a close call but Gossage should have gone in before him. The others had careers that were too short or were insufficiently dominant for a long enough period of time to deserve election.

 

[GWTJ]

The problem with the HOF, in any sport, is that as time goes on, the bar can only go down for admittance. I see no way to stop the trend. The players I object to are the ones with very long careers that build great stats by the sheer length of their career. Dave Winfield is the poster boy for such a player. Never great but always productive enough to finally build good career stats.

I once read a quote about Brooks Robinson. A player was complimenting him. He said, "Brooks Robinson looks like he came down from a higher league". That's how we should judge our Hall of Famers.

 

[jaxvid]

Brooks Robinson would be one of the guys kept out of the Hall by bigunreals standards of .300 average, he batted .267 in his career.

I think one has to judge a player by other things then just the cold stats. One thing is different positions have different offensive stats. 2nd baseman vs. 1st baseman for instance. There was a comment that Ryan Sandberg was undeserving, that's ridiculous, he may be undeserving as a 1st baseman but not as a 2nd baseman. And stats don't include fielding, baserunning, clutch performance etc.

 

[sunshine]

I agree with BigGun and otherson the idea that the HOF has been watered down. But since the horse has been let out of the barn it seems unfair to future candidates to bar the door on them unless you remove the Phil Rizzutos of the world and get back to higher standards.. . As for standards like .300 average etc. I agree with Jaxvid. Brooks Robinson has HOF a written all over him. So it can't be just based on stats or longevity or WS rings. That rush to put Kirby Puckett in the HOF seems strange in retrospect. The guy played in a plastic bubble of a ball park. Gossage recentlydefended Rice and put down Puckett. Mattingly was seen as a better player than Puckett until Puckett played well in the WS.

 

[Poacher]

Check out this recent article on Mark McGwire and the HOF:



http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/john_donovan /01/13/mcgwire.hall/index.html



Barry Bonds does not get called to testify at these hearings but
McGwire does and this jackass is willing to ignore Mcgwire's
career. Un-freakin'-believable.

 

[foreverfree]

Check out this recent article on Mark McGwire and the HOF:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/john_donovan /01/13/mcgwire.hall/index.html

The link seems to have expired.

John