Pete Rose

[bigunreal]

I just heard on the "Mike and Mike" show (terrible show-but one of
those I scan through duriing work commute) that Bud Selig has refused
to reinstate Pete Rose once again, and that next year is the last year
he can be reinstated. Thus, if that doesn't happen, the only way Rose
can ever get into the Hall of Fame is through the Veterans Committee.
Golic and "Greenie" (what an annoying idiot he is) said that it is well
known that Rose will never, ever get voted in by the Veterans
Committee. This story just keeps getting more remarkable. Here we have
the al-time Major League leader in hits, at bats and runs scored, and
he is not in the Hall of Fame. While scores of mediocre black players
have committed violent crimes, or had sex with underaged girls, or been
deeply involved with illegal drugs, Rose is persona non grata because
he gambled on baseball games. This case mirrors the nonsensical order
of priorities the leaders of Don King's America employ; violent crime
is less troubling than gambling. Even if Rose had bet against his own
team, which no one claims he did, that takes nothing away from his
accomplishments as a player.



We all know that this could never happen to a black superstar of Rose's
caliber. Not in a million years. There would have been outraged
speeches from the floor of Congress years ago. Jesse Jackson and Al
Sharpton would have called on a boycott of Major League Baseball until
its all-time hits leader was inducted into the Hall of Fame. Veterans
like Hank Aaron and Willie Mays would have been interviewed over and
over by the jock-sniiffing media about the gross injustice of all this.
Every one of the "journalists" who seem so unsympathetic towards Rose
would have editorialized on air, ad naseum, about how unfair the
situation was. If it dragged on for any length of time (which it
wouldn't), President Bush would address the nation about the gravitiy
of the situation. Above all else, race and racism would be mentioned
every single time the issue was discussed. IMHO, no other case points
out the disparity in treatment white and black athletes are subject to,
both legally and culturally. Think of it this way; two players from the
Big Red Machine- Tony Perez and Joe Morgan, are in the Hall of Fame,
while the most accomplished player from that same team is not. Perez
and Morgan epitomize the slew of undeserving modern players inducted
into the Hall of Fame for no good reason. It is a complete joke that
the player with more hits than anyone else who ever played the game is
not in the Hall of Fame.

 

[Don Wassall]

I agree. The final nail in the coffin was when Pete's book came out and he apologized for gambling on baseball -- but he didn't apologize the "right way." In America, when you fall from grace, your only possibility of being redeemed is to issue a cringing and groveling apology, many times over. Begging is mandatory, as is crying, with full-throated sobbing preferred.


Pete refused to act that way (to his credit) and was promptly skewered by every major sportswriter for his "lack of sincerity." Before that Rose at least had a few defenders in the media, but the herd united as one against him for goodand it's tough now to see how he will ever get in the Hall. He not only should be in Cooperstown, he should be coaching or managing somewhere. The man lived and breathed baseball. But there is no second chance for the all-time hits leader, who broke a record many thought would stand forever.


Gambling is built into college and pro sports. It is huge business, part of the fiber of the corrupt empire we live in. To single out Rose for permanent persecution for doing whatAmericans are encouraged to do every day is the height of hypocrisy and could only occur against a white superstar.

 

[sport historian]

It's worth noting that most blacks are on Rose's side in the matter of the HOF. Hank Aaron was quoted some years ago saying Pete Rose should be admitted. ESPN had a mock trial some years ago and the late Johnnie Cochran was speaking for Rose. Several time black guys have told me that they think Pete Rose should be allowed back into baseball and go into the HOF.

 

[Colonel_Reb]

I hope he gets in. He deserves it because of his play. I mean, he is the all-time hits leader, and probably for good.

 

[Kaptain]

Unlike Bonds, Rose did not cheat or effect the outcome of one game with his gambling. The hall of fame will officially be a joke when Bonds gets in and Pete is left out. They would never even investigate gambling on black players who are suspected.It would seem trival. Why haven't we heard of black players gambling in any sport? Are we to believe that although every other rule of baseball and society has been broken repeatedly by black players, they never gamble?

 

[right winger]

Actually, we know of one black who has been caught gambling: Adrian McPherson. His "reward" has been to be one of the most hyped quarterbacks in this year's draft, which would be a joke even if he hadn't gambled while playing for Florida State.

 

[Colonel_Reb]

The best player to come out of Florida State since I've been watching football was Martin? Gramatica. Charlie Ward was a joke. I never liked Bobby Bowden. Talk about one of the leading figures in the Caste System.

 

[KD52171]

I was lucky enough to meet Pete Rose when I was 12.


My family went to St louis for a couple of Card Phillies games. We were invited into the Cards dugout and Pete came over to do the pre-gameradio show inside the Cards dugout with Buck. After the interview was over we introduced ourselves and Pete took a pic with me and a friend of mine. He acted like it was joy for him to be in that pic.


He will always be a boyhood idol to me.


No player deserves to be in the Hall more than Pete right now.

 

[bigunreal]

It doesn't surprise me that most blacks support Rose's induction into
the Hall of Fame. However, the difference is that the white
jock-sniffers in the media, who usually defend players (especially
black players) no matter how bad their behavior is, are all lined up
against Rose. Where are the long-time p.c. sports "journalists" like
Frank Deford and Thomas Boswell, who have expended so much ink over the
years in favor of overpaid, surly athletes in general and the
despicable actions of various black athletes in particular? They are
silent on how absurd it is to deny admission to the Hall of Fame to the
player who had had more plate appearances, more runs scored and more
hits than anyone who ever played the game. As for Aaron and any other
black speaking out for Rose, the difference is that, if Rose were
black, the story would be the lead on every ESPN broadcast, and the
Jesse Jacksons of the world would join the fray. Boycotts would be
threatened, and the attitudes of the lame, wanna-be comedians in the
sports "journalistic" community would be much, much different when they
covered this subject.

 

[JD074]

If the people in baseball were more objective and reasonable,
they would discard this notion of "cardinal sin of baseball" crap.
The punishment should fit the crime, and in this case, it clearly
doesn't. A suspension of roughly 1-3 years would be
appropriate, along with the obligatory therapy or whatever
hurdles they feel like making him jump through.

 

[foreverfree]

two players from the Big Red Machine- Tony Perez and Joe Morgan, are in the Hall of Fame

I guess Johnny Bench doesn't count.

John

 

[bigunreal]

two players from the Big Red
Machine- Tony Perez and Joe Morgan, are in the Hall of Fame

I guess Johnny Bench doesn't count.



John

I was speaking about players who don't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. That wouldn't include Johnny Bench.

 

[Colonel_Reb]

I have an old Johnny Bench wooden little league bat. It's a Louisville Slugger of course, but it's probably close to 40 years old. just thought I'd swing in on the conversation again.

 

[jaxvid]

Actually Joe Morgan deserves to be in. He was a very productive second baseman. If you compare him to other position players maybe not but as a second baseman he is one of the top ten, maybe top five.

IMHO Lou Whitaker (long time Tigers 2nd baseman) is the best player alive not in the Hall (besides Rose) who deserves to be in. Whitaker put up tremendous power stats and fielding stats during a long consistent career. He is not in the Hall because he did not play on either coast and he was famously quiet and humble. A Jehovah's witness, he did not salute the flag or stand during the star spangled banner, another reason he may be unliked by the phony patriots in the media.

Bill James has Joe Morgan as the 2nd best 2nd baseman (behind Hornsby) maybe a little high and Whitaker in the top ten.

Perez is another story. He was quite productive but at positions where there are plenty of guys with his numbers that are not in the Hall. Also Perez committed a high profile crime which SHOULD put him on the outs with the media. I think he got in because when he was eligible it was the beginning of the Hispanic transformation of baseball and the press wanted to acknowledge that in the silly PC manner that they always do things. Although Perez is not really a bad HOF member, there are many worse.

 

[SVcabron]

I really love this website!!!!!!



Did everybody on this website have to go to a training seminar on how
to post? The reason I asked this is because in almost every
thread I read, I hear about "Don King's America" and boycotts against
_______ led by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, congressional hearings to
give the big black athletes special treatment. Thanks for the
laughs guys.



Anyways back on the subject, Pete Rose. I think he should be in
the HOF because of what he did as a player, which speaks for its
self. What he did as a player should have no bearing on what he
did as a manager. Yes he finally admitted that he gambled
on baseball many years after the fact. He only did so while
trying to sell a book which is pretty scummy, but being in the HOF is
about being a great ballplayer not a great person.

 

[bigunreal]

Jaxvid-



I really disagree with you about Morgan. His career batting average is
.271. That's pathetic for any HOF, unless you have 800 home runs or
something. He only had two .300 seasons in his 22 year career. He
supposedly had great power for a second baseman, but he only had a
single 100 RBI season. He was a good, solid player, but if you put
those kinds of players in the HOF, you have to make a lot more rooom,
because there are plenty of players in his class who aren't in there.
As for Bill James, he is one of the many apologists for modern day
ballplayers, and he has contrived various statistical methods to
explain the anemic batting averages of so many allegedly "great" modern
players, promote the overrated virtues of relief pitchers, and avoid
direct statitstical comparisons of players unless the modern player has
superior stats (in which case, those supposedly irrelevant stats become
relevant). The fact he has Morgan rated as the second best second
basemen of all time should render anything he says as meaningless (Just
off the top of my head, Frankie Frisch was light years ahead of him,
Charlie Gehringer's lifetime average was 49 points higher than
Morgan's, and Napoleon Lajoie's was 68 points higher, plus he had over
3000 hits ). While James is not as bad as Thomas Boswell, for instance,
he is definitely prejudiced in favor of modern day players. During his
handful of impressive years, Morgan was probably only the FOURTH best
player on his own team (Rose, Bench, Perez and George Foster). I think
the Hall of Fame needs to be a little more exclusive than that.

 

[Don Wassall]

Bigunreal, I agree with your opinion probably 99 percent of the time, but to me Joe Morgan belongs in the Hall of Fame. In fact I think it was appropriate that he made it in his first year of eligibility. If his had been a short career maybe not, but he played 22 seasons, and that kind of durability has to be factored in.


I'm looking at his career stats, and hewon 2 NL MVP Awards, 5 Gold Gloves, made 10 All Star appearances, had nearly 700 stolen bases, scored 1,650 runs and had 2,517 hits. He hit 268 homeruns, pretty darn good for a second baseman (and for a little guy) and only 80 less than George Foster, who was not known for anything other than power. I would put Morgan ahead of Foster on the Reds teams of the '70s and behind Rose and Bench, who were all-time greats. Morgan was an excellent all-around player and a real sparkplug on the Big Red Machine. He was one of the main reasons they were the dominant team they were.


Although it's not relevant to the Hall, Morgan is also one of the real class acts among black athletes.He's well spoken and knows baseball backwards and forwards. I think he would have been an excellent manager had he chosen to go that route. I enjoy listening to him as an announcer most of the time, though it's always humoroushowmost of his white on-air partners pander to him.

 

[bigunreal]

Don,



I also agree with you 99% of the time. I think that Morgan exemplifies
a very good baseball player who plays long enough to accumulate
impressive lifetime stats without having any really great seasons or
ever even being the best player on his team. Today, Fred McGriff and
Rafael Palmeiro are great examples of this. Neither of these guys
should be considered for the HOF for a second, imho, but they've had
enough good seasons to accumulate impressive career totals. Eddie
Murray was another player in this category. I just think that the HOF
should be reserved for the greatest players of all time, not every very
good player who played long enough to have impressive lifetime numbers.
At the other extreme, you have players who were brilliant for short
periods of time, but (usually because of inuries) don't have the
impressive career totals. Sandy Koufax is probably the best example of
this. A recent player in this category would be Don Mattingly. I
wouldn't argue that Mattingly should be in the HOF, but you could make
as good a case for players like him-who were undeniably great for less
than 10 years-than for the Morgans, McGriffs and Palmeiros, who have
great career numbers without having any (or only one or two) great
seasons. Remember that Dave Kingman put up nearly 500 HRs
lifetime, a club exclusive enough to ensure induction into the HOF.
That would have really been an embarassment, but carrying gaudy
lifetime numbers to their extreme might very well result in a mediocre
player like Kingman being inducted in the future. If Kingman had hit
only 58 more HRs, then we would almost certainly have had a career .236
hitter, who couldn't play the field at all, inducted into the HOF. If
guys like Morgan, Tony Perez and Orlando Cepeda are Hall of Famers,
what does that make Ty Cobb, Babe Ruth and Rogers Hornsby? Maybe we
need an inner sanctum at the HOF for the really great players in
baseball history.

 

[jaxvid]

bigunreal, I also agree with you most of the time, but here is my defense of Joe Morgan.

One. We're talking second base. Players are judged by the positions they play. Defense is a very important part of the game and you are just considering offensive stats.

Two. A players standing on a particuliar team (the Big Red Machine in this case) should not be an issue. Just because there are other worthy players does not diminish the accomplishments of Morgan.

Three. Here is why I like Bill James ratings, he uses "runs created" to rank players. This stat is specially developed to factor in those things that change from era to era such as pitching dominance, ball park sizes, playing on a poor team, and even the "dead ball", also pitchers and defensive specialists are included.

It works something like this. A baseline number is generated for the numbers of runs a team should score based on where they finished that year in that league. Then a players total "runs created" are calculated from his stats, runs created which also includes "runs prevented" from his putouts, assists, and for pitchers: outs caused and strikeouts. Then that players total is compared to the AVERAGE of what a player on that tteam would need to have to neither cause his teams to score more runs or cost them any runs. The surplus is considered "runs created" and all players at any position from any era can be compared by this method.

In your example Frankie Frisch may have hit for much higher average then Morgan, but so did everybody else in that era. Thus Frisch, while good, did not increase the performance of his team nearly as much as Morgan did his. And isn't that what baseball is about: helping your team win. So Morgans ranking is based on those things he did that led to wins for the Reds.

This stat helps eliminate the subjective bias in rating players. As it turns out the best players did in fact create a lot of runs for their teams so Cobb, Ruth, Hornsby's career runs created are at the top. But at second base so is Joe Morgan. It's an opinion "neutral" way of evaluating players so I think it is a very useful tool. Also gets rid of the caste system effects too!

 

[bigunreal]

Jaxvid-



It feels strange disagreeing with you (or Don) or almost anyone else
here, but the subject of who's better than who in baseball history has
been discussed for gnerations, so let's have fun with it. I have read
one of the Abstract books by Bill James, and it was interesting
reading. I just find that his various interpretation of statistical
data almost always favors modern players. He is particularly harsh on
many hitters who played during the '20s and '30s. His point that
everyone hit so well during the era is a sound one, but to be
consistent he should also be singing the praises of several pitchers
during that era whose stats appear mediocre at first glance. To my
knowledge, he doesn't do that, which reflects an agenda, imho, not to
reassess individual numbers in light of the league stats for that
period, but to make modern players look better.

 

[jaxvid]

I haven't noticed that about James myself but I do agree he has his biases. he actually rates players from the pre-1900 era quite high, of course no one gives those guys any repect nowadays, but this may be because he is such a stat guru that he gets off on being able to analyze stats from a hundred years ago.

He also is a big supporter of black baseball players especially the negro leagues of which there are NO stats to use, yet he rates those guys anyway. On the plus side he is not a big fan of Bonds and he does support Rose for the hall of fame. I think he does like Morgan personally and he now works for the Red Sox so you have all that.

Still I say Lou Whitaker for the Hall-of Fame! And I also like going back on forth on baseball discussions so feel free to dissent, I enjoy it too.

 

[bigunreal]

I admit to being biased against modern players in general. Baseball was
always my favorite sport, both to play and to follow, but they lost me
about five strikes ago. I followed baseball until about the late '70s,
and at that time I objected not only to the ridiculous salaries and bad
attitudes, but to the obvious deteriioration of play. I can't really
judge Whitaker, because I had pretty much stopped watching the game
during his career. What about Alan Trammell, who played next to him?
Would you put him in the HOF? Don't know his stats, but would imagine
they are at least comparable to Whitaker's. I am fascinated with
pre-1900 players as well, so James and I have something in common. I've
read quite a bit about the early days of baseball, and the subject
still fascinates me. One of the classic baseball books is "The Glory Of
Their Times," by Lawrence Ritter. It consists of taped recollections
from various old-timers about their major league careers. If you
haven't read it, I would highly recommend it. Another book of
recollections, of slightly more modern players, is "Baseball When The
Grass Was Green," by Donald Honig. It's very good as well, and probably
has more recognizable names in it.

 

[Don Wassall]

Topps refuses to acknowledge Rose as the all-time hits leader in its "chase" category on its 2013 cards. Pete will die without ever making the Hall of Fame or getting any kind of respect from the always hypocritical baseball establishment.


Baseball Card Company Omits All-Time Hit King


Pete Rose accrued 4,256 career hits during 24 seasons in Major League Baseball. That is a fact. Every player scratching out base hits in an MLB game is chasing Rose's all-time mark.

Meanwhile, every player racking up hits to be displayed on the back of his baseball card is chasing ... nobody?

As first noted by Chicago Side Sports, Topps decided to not recognize Rose on its cards and left his name out of a special section labeled "Career Chase" on the back of 2013 cards. Career leaders in other categories, including Barry Bonds, are named but there is no player being specified when it comes to hits mark.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/14/pete-rose-erased-from-top_n_2689283.html

 

[jaxvid]

Topps refuses to acknowledge Rose as the all-time hits leader in its "chase" category on its 2013 cards. Pete will die without ever making the Hall of Fame or getting any kind of respect from the always hypocritical baseball establishment.


Baseball Card Company Omits All-Time Hit King


Pete Rose accrued 4,256 career hits during 24 seasons in Major League Baseball. That is a fact. Every player scratching out base hits in an MLB game is chasing Rose's all-time mark.

Meanwhile, every player racking up hits to be displayed on the back of his baseball card is chasing ... nobody?

As first noted by Chicago Side Sports, Topps decided to not recognize Rose on its cards and left his name out of a special section labeled "Career Chase" on the back of 2013 cards. Career leaders in other categories, including Barry Bonds, are named but there is no player being specified when it comes to hits mark.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/14/pete-rose-erased-from-top_n_2689283.html

This sort of thing is to me, criminally stupid. It just goes to show how much hate there is for him out there. It makes absolutely no sense to punish his career playing stats for the crimes (he may have done) as a manager. What is the thinking here? Rose conspired to effect the outcome of games by getting as many hits as possible. Perhaps he bet that he would get a certain amout of hits? It's all so convoluted.

There is no relation to the small amout of betting he did as a manager to the amout of hits he accumulated in a life of playing hard every day. He should be held up as a role model for his accomplishments as he was certainly athletically limited even by the standards of the game at that time.

To continue to harass him in this kind of pickly little punk ass manner tells you all you need to know about the people running corporate sports. I don't even quite understand why he is attacked in this way. He was basically a lower class White guy that never said or did a politically incorrect thing in his life. He played at a time when blacks were prominent in the sport (perhaps that is why they hate him) and played along side them without issue. All I can figure is that they want to trash any White guy they can from back in the day and that is what drives the continued Pete Rose hate.

 

[DixieDestroyer]

What a'buncha knotheads. :tsk: That ol' Pete Rose was something else. He was one of the best ever...no doubt.