|
|
Post by anthonyd46 on Jan 28, 2021 13:45:21 GMT -5
Is that a bad thing? It probably is for the institution of the Hall of Fame, but given how many imps and scoundrels have found unnatural ways to improve their performance, lengthen their careers and manipulate their way onto annual and career leader boards, it’s just a reflection of an age of cheating and how this particular electorate dealt with it. It’s as though we had a bunch of Black Socks and Pete Roses running around. I’d rather see Shoeless Joe exonerated that any of these punks from the past couple decades, by the way... I'm just not in agreement with the blank ballot thing. Why even give these people a vote if they are going to turn in a blank ballot? |
|
|
|
Post by rizzuto on Jan 28, 2021 13:56:36 GMT -5
Does the blank ballot mean that no vote is cast for any of the players on the list to make the HOF? If so, I would have done the same, as none on the list that I saw would have been deserving in my estimation. I would not have voted for Harold Baines last time either.
|
|
|
|
HOF 2021
Jan 28, 2021 14:32:19 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by inger on Jan 28, 2021 14:32:19 GMT -5
Is that a bad thing? It probably is for the institution of the Hall of Fame, but given how many imps and scoundrels have found unnatural ways to improve their performance, lengthen their careers and manipulate their way onto annual and career leader boards, it’s just a reflection of an age of cheating and how this particular electorate dealt with it. It’s as though we had a bunch of Black Socks and Pete Roses running around. I’d rather see Shoeless Joe exonerated that any of these punks from the past couple decades, by the way... I'm just not in agreement with the blank ballot thing. Why even give these people a vote if they are going to turn in a blank ballot? The problem with not allowing a blank ballot is that if a voter truly doesn’t think any of the players on the ballot deserve selection, you would force one of two things to happen. Either the voters would be forced to vote for players who don’t meet their ethical standards, or you would force them to “down-ballot” choices who did not demonstrate the skills to deserve selection. I don’t think there have ever been so many blank ballots, but there have always been voters that have not placed all ten of the votes they’re allowed, and voters that have the fetish that won’t allow themselves to vote for players in their first year on the ballot. I can’t find a problem with it for me, but I do understand and respect your position... |
|
|
|
Post by domeplease on Jan 28, 2021 14:43:49 GMT -5
Schilling is a total shithead douche. That is well documented. So despite whether or not he deserves to be in, I personally am glad he is not.
"By the time he first appeared on a ballot in 2013, Schilling was embroiled in a massive lawsuit with the state of Rhode Island after a scandal involving misuse and default on a $75 million loan granted by the state to a gaming company fronted by Schilling.
The following year, Schilling himself was suspended from broadcast duties (in the midst of calling the Little League World Series, no less) when he shared memes and an incoherent diatribe likening Muslims to Nazis. He was finally fired from the network in 2016 after sharing more hateful posts targeting trans and other LGBTQ+ communities.
That’s only the beginning. Since then, Schilling has fully embraced his alt-right persona. Some of the more notable ways in which he’s used his sizable platform include sharing tweets and Facebook posts advocating for the lynching of journalists, agreeing with and promoting white supremacists on his Breitbart radio show, peddling QAnon takes, and generally spending his days regurgitating racist tropes and abuse across his social media accounts. As of yesterday, he still thinks the election was rigged and/or stolen. Make of that what you will."
I TOTALLY AGREE!!! I would hate to try and explain to my Son why a shithead douche like Schilling is in the HOF.
Ahh WAIT; i do not have a son--but Schilling in my books still does NOT belong in HOF.
|
|
|
|
Post by anthonyd46 on Jan 28, 2021 15:12:47 GMT -5
I'm just not in agreement with the blank ballot thing. Why even give these people a vote if they are going to turn in a blank ballot? The problem with not allowing a blank ballot is that if a voter truly doesn’t think any of the players on the ballot deserve selection, you would force one of two things to happen. Either the voters would be forced to vote for players who don’t meet their ethical standards, or you would force them to “down-ballot” choices who did not demonstrate the skills to deserve selection. I don’t think there have ever been so many blank ballots, but there have always been voters that have not placed all ten of the votes they’re allowed, and voters that have the fetish that won’t allow themselves to vote for players in their first year on the ballot. I can’t find a problem with it for me, but I do understand and respect your position... There's what 30 candidates or so? What is it saying that 14 people can't find a single person they agree should be inducted? It feels like we are at a point where there's not enough "clean" candidates and too many "questionable" ones. |
|
|
|
HOF 2021
Jan 28, 2021 15:27:26 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by inger on Jan 28, 2021 15:27:26 GMT -5
The problem with not allowing a blank ballot is that if a voter truly doesn’t think any of the players on the ballot deserve selection, you would force one of two things to happen. Either the voters would be forced to vote for players who don’t meet their ethical standards, or you would force them to “down-ballot” choices who did not demonstrate the skills to deserve selection. I don’t think there have ever been so many blank ballots, but there have always been voters that have not placed all ten of the votes they’re allowed, and voters that have the fetish that won’t allow themselves to vote for players in their first year on the ballot. I can’t find a problem with it for me, but I do understand and respect your position... There's what 30 candidates or so? What is it saying that 14 people can't find a single person they agree should be inducted? It feels like we are at a point where there's not enough "clean" candidates and too many "questionable" ones. Certainly no one has serious thoughts that the bottom ten candidates are going to win induction. In fact, on most ballots there are likely only 1-6 or 7 that have a real chance at getting inducted. Look, without PEDS, the are many players on this list. The players dared to use PEDs, and I feel every one of the players that did so had knowledge that there could be repercussions if they were caught. They thought they were too smart to get caught. Sorry! You weren’t... |
|
|
|
Post by anthonyd46 on Jan 28, 2021 16:38:28 GMT -5
There's what 30 candidates or so? What is it saying that 14 people can't find a single person they agree should be inducted? It feels like we are at a point where there's not enough "clean" candidates and too many "questionable" ones. Certainly no one has serious thoughts that the bottom ten candidates are going to win induction. In fact, on most ballots there are likely only 1-6 or 7 that have a real chance at getting inducted. Look, without PEDS, the are many players on this list. The players dared to use PEDs, and I feel every one of the players that did so had knowledge that there could be repercussions if they were caught. They thought they were too smart to get caught. Sorry! You weren’t... Ok but some of these players weren't caught and it's just "assumed" they did. |
|
|
|
Post by inger on Jan 28, 2021 18:39:20 GMT -5
Certainly no one has serious thoughts that the bottom ten candidates are going to win induction. In fact, on most ballots there are likely only 1-6 or 7 that have a real chance at getting inducted. Look, without PEDS, the are many players on this list. The players dared to use PEDs, and I feel every one of the players that did so had knowledge that there could be repercussions if they were caught. They thought they were too smart to get caught. Sorry! You weren’t... Ok but some of these players weren't caught and it's just "assumed" they did. Unfortunate circumstances. When you look at the statistical history of many, many players there are several incidences where it would appear that certain players may have given themselves a temporary boost to gain larger contracts that go back into the 1980’s. I will admit that I have a tendency toward mistrust towards many players. I will also say that in my opinion we will also never know even how many marginal players “used” just so they could hand on as role players. Cheating was rampant, and I believe it to the point that there was NO player in the era that would shock me to find out that some sort of usage occurred. Even when I bowled in a league, there were several players that we said to have “loaded” bowling balls. We knew of corked bats for many years. There was question as to how effective they were, but it was against the rules to use them. Norm Cash openly admitted to using them in 1961... |
|
|
|
Post by chiyankee on Dec 5, 2021 18:45:23 GMT -5
The new hall of famers are in. It's strange that Allen hasn't been elected yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by chiyankee on Dec 5, 2021 18:47:02 GMT -5
These two also got in, too bad neither are alive to enjoy it. EDIT: Fowler died in 1913, long before there was a HOF, so I guess we can excuse that one.
|
|
|
|
Post by chiyankee on Dec 5, 2021 18:52:12 GMT -5
In case you needed another reason to make fun of MLB. Why wouldn't they have a show on Tuesday or Wednesday night to announce the new HOF's?
Instead MLB does it in the middle of a Sunday, when there are NFL games on. Idiots.
|
|
|
|
Post by pippsheadache on Dec 5, 2021 19:41:39 GMT -5
The new hall of famers are in. It's strange that Allen hasn't been elected yet. Dick Allen was a far more impactful player than Gil Hodges. Nothing but respect for Gil, who was a very good player and an even better person. But Allen was a monster. His career stats are full of black ink in significant offensive categories; Hodges is essentially blank. Gil was a much better defensive player than Dick, no question. But as a first baseman, that meant far less than it would have at some other position. Dick Allen was one of the most gifted sluggers I have ever personally witnessed. For sure, he squandered some of that talent with the bottle and his personality quirks irked the media of his day. But with all of that, he did more to deserve HOF status than Hodges. Oliva should have been in long ago, his numbers are a sea of black ink. Minoso was legendary. Jim Kaat? Love the guy. I wouldn't rain on his parade, and he did win 286 games (and lost a lot too.) But not much black ink, and most of it came in a single season, 1966. A career ERA+ of 108. Pettitte, who is often considered borderline, was at 119. Schilling was 127 and had plenty of black ink and a far better WHIP, as well as being arguably the best post-season starting pitcher of his era. But I'm happy for Kitty to get this at age 83 and I am sure he will give an outstanding acceptance speech. There is something to be said for longevity, and there are less-deserving pitchers in there for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by rizzuto on Dec 5, 2021 21:28:51 GMT -5
The new hall of famers are in. It's strange that Allen hasn't been elected yet. Dick Allen was a far more impactful player than Gil Hodges. Nothing but respect for Gil, who was a very good player and an even better person. But Allen was a monster. His career stats are full of black ink in significant offensive categories; Hodges is essentially blank. Gil was a much better defensive player than Dick, no question. But as a first baseman, that meant far less than it would have at some other position. Dick Allen was one of the most gifted sluggers I have ever personally witnessed. For sure, he squandered some of that talent with the bottle and his personality quirks irked the media of his day. But with all of that, he did more to deserve HOF status than Hodges. Oliva should have been in long ago, his numbers are a sea of black ink. Minoso was legendary. Jim Kaat? Love the guy. I wouldn't rain on his parade, and he did win 286 games (and lost a lot too.) But not much black ink, and most of it came in a single season, 1966. A career ERA+ of 108. Pettitte, who is often considered borderline, was at 119. Schilling was 127 and had plenty of black ink and a far better WHIP, as well as being arguably the best post-season starting pitcher of his era. But I'm happy for Kitty to get this at age 83 and I am sure he will give an outstanding acceptance speech. There is something to be said for longevity, and there are less-deserving pitchers in there for sure. Spot on regarding Dick Allen over Gil Hodges, Pipps. Kaat’s career line has improved with age, as I was much more reticent toward his election years ago. No doubt my lowering the bar for him is due to my enjoyment of his color commentary over the years, and I really like the good-naturedness of the guy. Schilling’s career numbers, particularly ERA, benefited from his tenure in the National League in much the same manner as Pettitte’s were inflated from a career in the American League East. Pettitte’s three-year stint in Houston produced a 3.38 ERA, a half-run lower than his time in Pinstripes at 3.94. Schilling’s five-year term in Boston produced a 3.95 ERA, essentially a half-run increase over his 3.35 ERA in Philly. Years ago, I did a statistical dive in the comparison of the two, arguing that if Schilling ever got into the Hall of Fame, then Pettitte was deserving as well. Pettitte managed a lineup like hurlers of the 1970s, pitching around guys who hurt him to attack players with whom his cutter would produce a ground ball. WHIP is such a relatively new measurement and perhaps less meaningful in decades past because of that philosophy of pitching. There were some brutal DH types in the AL of the 1990s that just are not prevalent in the game of recent years. Stanton was the best of the bunch last season. Where are all the big bats like Jim Thome, Ortiz, Edgar, The Big Hurt, and Giambi? |
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Dec 5, 2021 21:40:22 GMT -5
I think comparing past to present players is pretty much impossible. There are too many differences, to assess them.
|
|
|
|
HOF 2021
Dec 5, 2021 21:48:34 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by inger on Dec 5, 2021 21:48:34 GMT -5
The new hall of famers are in. It's strange that Allen hasn't been elected yet. Dick Allen was a far more impactful player than Gil Hodges. Nothing but respect for Gil, who was a very good player and an even better person. But Allen was a monster. His career stats are full of black ink in significant offensive categories; Hodges is essentially blank. Gil was a much better defensive player than Dick, no question. But as a first baseman, that meant far less than it would have at some other position. Dick Allen was one of the most gifted sluggers I have ever personally witnessed. For sure, he squandered some of that talent with the bottle and his personality quirks irked the media of his day. But with all of that, he did more to deserve HOF status than Hodges. Oliva should have been in long ago, his numbers are a sea of black ink. Minoso was legendary. Jim Kaat? Love the guy. I wouldn't rain on his parade, and he did win 286 games (and lost a lot too.) But not much black ink, and most of it came in a single season, 1966. A career ERA+ of 108. Pettitte, who is often considered borderline, was at 119. Schilling was 127 and had plenty of black ink and a far better WHIP, as well as being arguably the best post-season starting pitcher of his era. But I'm happy for Kitty to get this at age 83 and I am sure he will give an outstanding acceptance speech. There is something to be said for longevity, and there are less-deserving pitchers in there for sure. Kitty earns extra points with me for being able to reinvent himself to continue his meaningful years. He also pitched well for a lot of bad Washington/ Minnesota teams. After age 36 he went 48-50 as a spot starter / reliever. At 238-187 prior to that point, he was probably already deserving. It’s almost tempting to remove points for what he did to extend his career, which really isn’t fair. Hodges had such a short peak that it’s difficult for me to understand what he meant to his teams… He feels almost like a Jim Gentile type that flashed talent, but emerged above his normal level for only a short span of time. I give Minoso credit for a late arrival, and think of what might have been on top of what was… |
|
