(01-09-2014 03:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 02:00 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 09:33 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I think Bagwell and Piazza are looking 2 years from now realistically. I think anytime you have 3 1st timers like we had this year or next year- it's going to be hard for the hold-overs.

I can see that. However, does that mean schilling and Mussina don't get in?

eventually. Just going to take some time..

perhaps you're right

(01-09-2014 02:07 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 02:04 PM)Lush Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 01:59 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 11:35 AM)Lush Wrote:  pudge won't get in. i don't have a problem with voters not letting suspected ped users in. it's horsesh!t, but it'd cloud my perception if i were a voter. i also think the veteran's committee needs to be retooled. i also think that the hall of fame is an exclusive club and it has gotten pretty lenient over the years.

how can it be lenient when bagwell, biggio and piazza are on the outside looking in?

have you seen the inductees? maybe not first or second ballot, but andre dawson, jim rice, barry larkin, ron santo.... grasping at straws

that i do agree with. Rice has no business being anywhere near the HOF. I think Larkin deserves it though. On the one hand there are definitely some players who don't deserve it, but OTOH you have bagwell, biggio, piazza, mussina and schilling

bags was my favorite player (besides albert belle) growing up. i still wouldn't vote him in. just enough ped speculation.

One snub I don't see mentioned here is Tim "Rock" Raines. He may fall short if we take the "Fame" part literally, having spent his prime years toiling for the Expos, but he's almost certainly one of the five best leadoff hitters of all-time. Career line: .294/.385/.425 - .810 OPS, 2605 hits, 808 SBs (5th all-time, and 3rd all-time among players born after the 1800s). Perhaps his involvement in the cocaine scandal from the '80s is being held against him.

(01-10-2014 09:56 AM)Lush Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 02:07 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 02:04 PM)Lush Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 01:59 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 11:35 AM)Lush Wrote:  pudge won't get in. i don't have a problem with voters not letting suspected ped users in. it's horsesh!t, but it'd cloud my perception if i were a voter. i also think the veteran's committee needs to be retooled. i also think that the hall of fame is an exclusive club and it has gotten pretty lenient over the years.

how can it be lenient when bagwell, biggio and piazza are on the outside looking in?

have you seen the inductees? maybe not first or second ballot, but andre dawson, jim rice, barry larkin, ron santo.... grasping at straws

that i do agree with. Rice has no business being anywhere near the HOF. I think Larkin deserves it though. On the one hand there are definitely some players who don't deserve it, but OTOH you have bagwell, biggio, piazza, mussina and schilling

bags was my favorite player (besides albert belle) growing up. i still wouldn't vote him in. just enough ped speculation.

dude you sound like a ridiculous journalist write (see what I did there?) now. Just enough PED speculation? As in absolutely none? This is a man's life and his life's work and you're basically saying 'well he's nowhere near guilty, but let's throw him in with the guilty ones just to be sure.' That's disgusting

(01-10-2014 01:50 PM)Sir Duke Wrote:  One snub I don't see mentioned here is Tim "Rock" Raines. He may fall short if we take the "Fame" part literally, having spent his prime years toiling for the Expos, but he's almost certainly one of the five best leadoff hitters of all-time. Career line: .294/.385/.425 - .810 OPS, 2605 hits, 808 SBs (5th all-time, and 3rd all-time among players born after the 1800s). Perhaps his involvement in the cocaine scandal from the '80s is being held against him.

I agree, he's definitely a snub, albeit a more minor one. His peak was amazing, but it was rather short. I think he deserves to be in, but there are 5 or 6 who I think deserve it more

(01-10-2014 03:58 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-10-2014 09:56 AM)Lush Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 02:07 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 02:04 PM)Lush Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 01:59 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  how can it be lenient when bagwell, biggio and piazza are on the outside looking in?

have you seen the inductees? maybe not first or second ballot, but andre dawson, jim rice, barry larkin, ron santo.... grasping at straws

that i do agree with. Rice has no business being anywhere near the HOF. I think Larkin deserves it though. On the one hand there are definitely some players who don't deserve it, but OTOH you have bagwell, biggio, piazza, mussina and schilling

bags was my favorite player (besides albert belle) growing up. i still wouldn't vote him in. just enough ped speculation.

dude you sound like a ridiculous journalist write (see what I did there?) now. Just enough PED speculation? As in absolutely none? This is a man's life and his life's work and you're basically saying 'well he's nowhere near guilty, but let's throw him in with the guilty ones just to be sure.' That's disgusting

for your sake good thing i don't have a vote! i wouldn't say bags and piazza are completely free from speculation. the rumors are out there and my boyhood idol wally joyner even came under scrutiny. i'm just an old school baseball fan much like these voters (i can only imagine) and there can't be a hint of cheating to be part of the most exclusive club in all of sports. it's unfortunate that a lot of ball players who would otherwise be hall worthy happened to play during the steroid era. it's just as unfortunate that some folk maybe never even got to display their hall worthy talents during wwII.

(01-11-2014 10:57 AM)Lush Wrote:  

(01-10-2014 03:58 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-10-2014 09:56 AM)Lush Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 02:07 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 02:04 PM)Lush Wrote:  have you seen the inductees? maybe not first or second ballot, but andre dawson, jim rice, barry larkin, ron santo.... grasping at straws

that i do agree with. Rice has no business being anywhere near the HOF. I think Larkin deserves it though. On the one hand there are definitely some players who don't deserve it, but OTOH you have bagwell, biggio, piazza, mussina and schilling

bags was my favorite player (besides albert belle) growing up. i still wouldn't vote him in. just enough ped speculation.

dude you sound like a ridiculous journalist write (see what I did there?) now. Just enough PED speculation? As in absolutely none? This is a man's life and his life's work and you're basically saying 'well he's nowhere near guilty, but let's throw him in with the guilty ones just to be sure.' That's disgusting

for your sake good thing i don't have a vote! i wouldn't say bags and piazza are completely free from speculation. the rumors are out there and my boyhood idol wally joyner even came under scrutiny. i'm just an old school baseball fan much like these voters (i can only imagine) and there can't be a hint of cheating to be part of the most exclusive club in all of sports. it's unfortunate that a lot of ball players who would otherwise be hall worthy happened to play during the steroid era. it's just as unfortunate that some folk maybe never even got to display their hall worthy talents during wwII.

Pujols isn't free from speculation either. Does he also not belong in?

(11-29-2013 01:14 PM)RaiderATO Wrote:  People that SHOULD get in this year won't because they didn't put anyone in last year (among the normal issues with the BBWAA balloting).

Maddux should be 100% (he won't) and he's the only one that I can say for certain will get in this year.

Neither Jackie Robinson nor Hank Aaron got in unanimously. If they didn't get 100% of the vote, what (in your delusional mind) makes you think Greg Maddux should get 100% over those two iconic HOFers? Do you truly think Maddux is better than JACKIE F**KING ROBINSON? Un-freaking-believable!!!!!!!

(01-12-2014 12:04 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(11-29-2013 01:14 PM)RaiderATO Wrote:  People that SHOULD get in this year won't because they didn't put anyone in last year (among the normal issues with the BBWAA balloting).

Maddux should be 100% (he won't) and he's the only one that I can say for certain will get in this year.

Do you truly think Maddux is better than JACKIE F**KING ROBINSON? Un-freaking-believable!!!!!!!

umm, I do. i don't disagree with your premise, but yes, maddux was better than Robinson. JR only had 7 seasons with over 500 plate appearances. yes, I realize the reason why, but that doesn't change the fact that from 1988 to 2008 maddux pitched at least 194 innings in every single season including the two strike shortened seasons. Maddux had 11 seasons of over 5.0 WAR, Robinson had 6. Again I realize the reason why, but no sane individual would rank Robinson ahead of Maddux on a best of list. Maddux is 3rd in WAR amongst pitchers in the modern era (post WWII). 2nd if you remove Clemens (if that's your thing)

If I were ranking the modern era position players, Robinson probably wouldn't be in my top 20:
Bonds
Mays
A-rod
Aaron
Frank Robinson
Ted Williams
Griffey
Mantle
Clemente
Schmidt
etc.

(01-11-2014 03:10 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-11-2014 10:57 AM)Lush Wrote:  

(01-10-2014 03:58 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-10-2014 09:56 AM)Lush Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 02:07 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  that i do agree with. Rice has no business being anywhere near the HOF. I think Larkin deserves it though. On the one hand there are definitely some players who don't deserve it, but OTOH you have bagwell, biggio, piazza, mussina and schilling

bags was my favorite player (besides albert belle) growing up. i still wouldn't vote him in. just enough ped speculation.

dude you sound like a ridiculous journalist write (see what I did there?) now. Just enough PED speculation? As in absolutely none? This is a man's life and his life's work and you're basically saying 'well he's nowhere near guilty, but let's throw him in with the guilty ones just to be sure.' That's disgusting

for your sake good thing i don't have a vote! i wouldn't say bags and piazza are completely free from speculation. the rumors are out there and my boyhood idol wally joyner even came under scrutiny. i'm just an old school baseball fan much like these voters (i can only imagine) and there can't be a hint of cheating to be part of the most exclusive club in all of sports. it's unfortunate that a lot of ball players who would otherwise be hall worthy happened to play during the steroid era. it's just as unfortunate that some folk maybe never even got to display their hall worthy talents during wwII.

Pujols isn't free from speculation either. Does he also not belong in?

i'm noticeable silent

I long ago gave up trying to decide how the HoF voters determine who to vote for, and who not to vote for. Their thinking has baffled me since the 1950s.

(01-12-2014 10:26 AM)Lush Wrote:  

(01-11-2014 03:10 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-11-2014 10:57 AM)Lush Wrote:  

(01-10-2014 03:58 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(01-10-2014 09:56 AM)Lush Wrote:  bags was my favorite player (besides albert belle) growing up. i still wouldn't vote him in. just enough ped speculation.

dude you sound like a ridiculous journalist write (see what I did there?) now. Just enough PED speculation? As in absolutely none? This is a man's life and his life's work and you're basically saying 'well he's nowhere near guilty, but let's throw him in with the guilty ones just to be sure.' That's disgusting

for your sake good thing i don't have a vote! i wouldn't say bags and piazza are completely free from speculation. the rumors are out there and my boyhood idol wally joyner even came under scrutiny. i'm just an old school baseball fan much like these voters (i can only imagine) and there can't be a hint of cheating to be part of the most exclusive club in all of sports. it's unfortunate that a lot of ball players who would otherwise be hall worthy happened to play during the steroid era. it's just as unfortunate that some folk maybe never even got to display their hall worthy talents during wwII.

Pujols isn't free from speculation either. Does he also not belong in?

i'm noticeable silent

oh man, him too? thank god you don't have a vote

(01-12-2014 12:04 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(11-29-2013 01:14 PM)RaiderATO Wrote:  People that SHOULD get in this year won't because they didn't put anyone in last year (among the normal issues with the BBWAA balloting).

Maddux should be 100% (he won't) and he's the only one that I can say for certain will get in this year.

Neither Jackie Robinson nor Hank Aaron got in unanimously. If they didn't get 100% of the vote, what (in your delusional mind) makes you think Greg Maddux should get 100% over those two iconic HOFers? Do you truly think Maddux is better than JACKIE F**KING ROBINSON? Un-freaking-believable!!!!!!!

Is there any doubt in your mind that Maddux is a HOFer? No. Zero doubt.

Because Aaron or Cobb or whomever didn't get 100% doesn't mean that Maddux shouldn't get it. Those guys probably should have gotten 100% too.

Biggio was robbed!!!