Jump to content

HOFers


Steubenhoosier
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hopefully, Kaat and O'Neil getting in is a sign that the Hall of Fame looks beyond just stats when making these decisions going forward.  Even if their stats on the field were borderline worthy of induction, both gave their entire lives to the sport in important capacities.  Hell, O'Neil should have been elected 5 seconds after Ken Burns' documentary aired.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
2 hours ago, 5fouls said:

David Ortiz getting elected while Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens don't is an indictment on Hall of Fame voting.

It's one of the biggest jokes going and these baseball writers should all have their voting rights taken away. What's even worse is Bonds had 500 HR's before he was suspected of using anything. Glad so many players (current and former) are letting it be known how bad a look this is for the sport. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Seeking6 said:

It's one of the biggest jokes going and these baseball writers should all have their voting rights taken away. What's even worse is Bonds had 500 HR's before he was suspected of using anything. Glad so many players (current and former) are letting it be known how bad a look this is for the sport. 

Both those guys are in the top 3 players at their positions I've seen in my lifetime.  Peds were against the rules.  I get it.  But, so is a pitcher doctoring the ball.  Yet, Gaylord Perry is in the Hall and he is nowhere close to the pitcher Clemens was.

Peds were so prevalent during that time, it's impossible to properly 'punish' all the guilty parties.  There are players already in the Hall just as guilty as those two when it comes to Peds, and who were not as good on the field.  

Clemens and Bonds are being held to an unfair standard compared to their peers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am one who doesn't understand why guys can be on the ballot for years.  The players should be on there one time and if you think they are a HoFmer then vote them in.  Do these guys get better after being on the ballot for years, no they don't.  There shouldn't be a limit on how many can he elected each year.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I am one who doesn't understand why guys can be on the ballot for years.  The players should be on there one time and if you think they are a HoFmer then vote them in.  Do these guys get better after being on the ballot for years, no they don't.  There shouldn't be a limit on how many can he elected each year.

I disagree with that. What if Griffey, Rivera and Jeter retired the same year. Not all 3 would get enough votes to make it.  All are deserving 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Billingsley99 said:

I might be in the minority here but the cheaters are getting what they deserve. They obviously were looking for shortcuts and did not feel that there skills were good enough without cheating.  

Meh, if you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'.  Cheating been going on in baseball for a very, very long time.  It is part of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, rico said:

Meh, if you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'.  Cheating been going on in baseball for a very, very long time.  It is part of the game.

That is true but a big difference in my opinion. If people really think that no one should have any issue with the Astros most on here seem to blast them for cheating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Billingsley99 said:

I disagree with that. What if Griffey, Rivera and Jeter retired the same year. Not all 3 would get enough votes to make it.  All are deserving 

Why wouldn't they all get enough votes.  Your name is on the list and the writers should get to vote for anyone who they think are HOF material.  To me it doesn't make sense that someone after 8 tries are now good enough to be voted in.  Your stats didn't change in those years so this doesn't make any sense to me.

Also to me the HOF is for the best of all time and not just a very good player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Why wouldn't they all get enough votes.  Your name is on the list and the writers should get to vote for anyone who they think are HOF material.  To me it doesn't make sense that someone after 8 tries are now good enough to be voted in.  Your stats didn't change in those years so this doesn't make any sense to me.

Also to me the HOF is for the best of all time and not just a very good player.

You can only vote for 10 players. And lately the ballot has been loaded with guys who deserve to get in. After this year, a few fall off to open up some spots for other guys like Rolen and Helton. I like the way the voting is done. They just need to change who has the votes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, landrus13 said:

You can only vote for 10 players. And lately the ballot has been loaded with guys who deserve to get in. After this year, a few fall off to open up some spots for other guys like Rolen and Helton. I like the way the voting is done. They just need to change who has the votes. 

In my original post I said that if you changed the rule about only getting one shot then the voters could vote for as many as they want.  To me it is stupid to limit the amount that can get in at one time.  Like I said you are either a HOFmer or your not

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

In my original post I said that if you changed the rule about only getting one shot then the voters could vote for as many as they want.  To me it is stupid to limit the amount that can get in at one time.  Like I said you are either a HOFmer or your not

Trivia Question,

How many first ballot Hall of Famers were there between 1937 (1936 was original group inducted) and 1962?

Answer - Zero

In my mind David Ortiz is a borderline Hall of Famer, let alone a first ballot guy.  But, your approach to only giving them one shot puts him in the hall while a whole generation misses out.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IU Scott said:

Why wouldn't they all get enough votes.  Your name is on the list and the writers should get to vote for anyone who they think are HOF material.  To me it doesn't make sense that someone after 8 tries are now good enough to be voted in.  Your stats didn't change in those years so this doesn't make any sense to me.

Also to me the HOF is for the best of all time and not just a very good player.

It makes a lot of sense, I'm an idiot that was thinking one thing and typing something different while trying to take a call. Wife says I can't do 1 thing right let alone trying to do 3 things at once. Carry on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buddy of mine is all baseball all the time. This whole Ortiz in but Bonds not thing still ticks him off. Sent me this stat this morning. Ortiz lifetime OBP was .380...if you turned all 762 HR's by Bonds into outs his OBP would still be .384.

I hope at some point when we get a new commissioner he or she steps in and says I'm undoing the rules. Bonds, Rose, Clemens, and a couple others are getting in the HOF.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Seeking6 said:

Buddy of mine is all baseball all the time. This whole Ortiz in but Bonds not thing still ticks him off. Sent me this stat this morning. Ortiz lifetime OBP was .380...if you turned all 762 HR's by Bonds into outs his OBP would still be .384.

I hope at some point when we get a new commissioner he or she steps in and says I'm undoing the rules. Bonds, Rose, Clemens, and a couple others are getting in the HOF.

I'm a Reds fan and grew up watching the Big Red Machine, but Rose being out of the Hall does not bother me as much as Bonds and Clemens not being in.  If you look at what happened in 1919, it's perfectly understandable that gambling can't be part of the game, and breaking that rule must be dealt with harshly.  By contrast, In the grand scheme of things, Bonds and Clemens taking steroids in the era that they did is like Kelvin Sampson having excessive calls/texts at IU.  the ultimate punishment simply does not fit the crime.

That OBP stat is absolutely amazing btw.     

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

I'm a Reds fan and grew up watching the Big Red Machine, but Rose being out of the Hall does not bother me as much as Bonds and Clemens not being in.  If you look at what happened in 1919, it's perfectly understandable that gambling can't be part of the game, and breaking that rule must be dealt with harshly.  By contrast, In the grand scheme of things, Bonds and Clemens taking steroids in the era that they did is like Kelvin Sampson having excessive calls/texts at IU.  the ultimate punishment simply does not fit the crime.

That OBP stat is absolutely amazing btw.     

Until you factor in the legacy that they cheated some people out of...

Roger Maris and Junior Griffey come to mind...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/29/2022 at 10:01 PM, 5fouls said:

I'm a Reds fan and grew up watching the Big Red Machine, but Rose being out of the Hall does not bother me as much as Bonds and Clemens not being in.  If you look at what happened in 1919, it's perfectly understandable that gambling can't be part of the game, and breaking that rule must be dealt with harshly.  By contrast, In the grand scheme of things, Bonds and Clemens taking steroids in the era that they did is like Kelvin Sampson having excessive calls/texts at IU.  the ultimate punishment simply does not fit the crime.

That OBP stat is absolutely amazing btw.     

To me Bonds and the rest of the cheaters chose Fame and money over the game and now they need to deal with those consequences. Bonds has the HR record but not a place in the hall. It was his choice to cheat now live with where the chips fall. Zero compassion for any of them. Without HGH does Bonds stay healthy enough to hit 762?? With HGH would Jr had stayed healthy enough to hit 800 maybe but he made the choice not to cheat and is rightfully where the great belong. 

One of the biggest problems from that whole era is what it did to the young guys coming up thinking they also had to cheat to try and level the playing field.  Seeing the money those guys were making did encourage others to do the same. Its not Bonds fault that others chose to follow his lead but when what some call the greatest to have played is one of the biggest cheaters you can see why others did the same. I will never agree that they need to be in the Hall of Fame. They were great without, it and it they were that great then why cheat if you don't need to?  the answer is money, greed selfishness etc.. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm ok with letting them in...In a separate wing, decorated like what we imagine Hell looking like, and a big screen up front scrolling through the tainted records and pointing out the cheaters

"All Time Home Run Leaders"

1. Hank Aaron 755

2. Babe Ruth 714

* Barry Bonds hit 762 home runs, but he cheated...Alex Rodriguez cheated too

:D 

 

Edited by IUFLA
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...