Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Eephus

***2013 Baseball Hall of Fame Thread

193 posts in this topic

Samuel Breadon

Purchased interest in the St. Louis Cardinals in 1917 and took control of the club in 1920. Breadon hired Branch Rickey and created the blueprint for the modern farm system with minor league clubs owned or controlled by the parent club. Presided over nine pennant winners and six World Series championships, include the Gashouse Gang teams of the 1930s and the dynasty teams of the 1940s. During his tenure as principle owner, the Cardinals posted a 2,470-1,830 record, good for a .574 winning percentage.

Bill Dahlen

Spent 21 seasons in the majors from 1891-1911, playing almost 90 percent of his games at shortstop, compiling a .272 batting average with 84 home runs and 1,234 RBI. He scored 100 or more runs in each of his first six seasons and recorded 120 hits or more 15 times. He retired in 1911 as the active home run leader with 84 and as the all-time leader in games played (2,444). More information courtesy of Baseball-Reference.

Wes Ferrell

Pitched for 15 seasons from 1927-1941, compiling a 193-128 record with a 4.04 career ERA. Six times won 20 games and is the only pitcher from the 20th century to win at least 20 games in each of first four full big league seasons. Led the league in complete games four times and was runner-up for the A.L. MVP in 1935. • Marty Marion spent 13 seasons in the majors, 1940-50, 1952-53, batting .263 with 36 home runs and 624 RBI at shortstop. Was named the 1944 N.L. MVP Award winner, twice also finishing in the top 10. Considered one of the best fielding shortstops of his era. Career stats courtesy of Baseball-Reference.

Marty Marion

Spent 13 seasons in the majors, 1940-50, 1952-53, batting .263 with 36 home runs and 624 RBI at shortstop. Was named the 1944 N.L. MVP Award winner, twice also finishing in the top 10. Considered one of the best fielding shortstops of his era. Career stats courtesy of Baseball-Reference.

Tony Mullane

Won 284 games in 13 major league seasons from 1881-1894, hurling complete games in 468 of his 504 career starts. Won 30 or more games in each of his first five full seasons. Posted a career 284-220 record, with a 3.05 lifetime era. Career stats courtesy of Baseball-Reference.

Hank O’Day

Spent 30 years as a major league umpire during a period from 1888-1927, officiating 10 World Series, tied for second most in history. Was selected to umpire the first World Series in 1903. Also played and managed in the majors, as a pitcher from 1884-1890. Managed the 1912 Reds and the 1914 Cubs. Career stats courtesy of Baseball-Reference.

Al Reach

Served as an executive with the Philadelphia club of the National League from 1883-1903, following a five-year playing career from 1871-1875 with the Athletics. Established the A.J. Reach Company to produce baseball and other sporting equipment, producing the official baseball of the American League. From 1883-1939, published “Reach’s Official Base Ball Guide,” providing readers with statistics and stories, which served as the official publication of both the American Association and American League. Career stats courtesy of Baseball-Reference.

Jacob Ruppert

Owned the New York Yankees from 1915-1939, with his teams winning six World Series titles and nine American League pennants during his ownership. During his tenure, more than a dozen future Hall of Famers donned pinstripes, including Babe Ruth, whose contract Ruppert purchased from the Red Sox for $125,000. In 1923, Ruppert led the construction of Yankee Stadium, the same year the club captured their first World Series title.

Bucky Walters

Pitched 19 seasons in the major leagues, from 1934-1950, compiling a 198-160 lifetime record, with a 3.30 era in 428 games/398 starts. Named 1939 NL MVP Award winner, posting a 27-11 record, with a 2.29 ERA, winning the pitching Triple Crown with 137 strikeouts. Named to five All-Star teams. Converted from infielder following his first four seasons in the majors from 1931-34. Career stats courtesy of Baseball-Reference.

Deacon White

Played for 20 major league seasons from 1871-1890, compiling a .312 batting average, while playing all nine positions on the field. Best remembered as one of the finest barehanded catchers of his time

Previous veterans committees have covered this period pretty completely. Bill Dahlen has the best case among the players but if I had one vote, it would go to Ruppert. Edited by Eephus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oso ballot (no particular order):

1. Tim Raines

2. Jeff Bagwell

3. Alan Trammell

4. Mike Piazza

5. Mark McGwire

6. Barry Bonds

7. Roger Clemens

8. Craig Biggio

9. Dale Murphy

10. Julio Franco (nostalgia/homer pick)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a mess to me. I would put Piazza in and maybe Craig Biggio. I'm a little surprised Morris and McGriff haven't gotten more love in the past.

Beyond that, you have steroid users and guys that were never great players.

I really think Bonds/Clemens deserve to be in the hall because they were SO much better even than the other steroid-era players. Guys like Sosa would never even be on this list if they hadn't taken steroids. It's too subjective though to handle it that way so I'm cool with leaving them all out.

Even a class of Piazza alone would be fine with me. He was one of the true elites in his prime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

too subjective? the whole process is subjective.

Fair point.In that case, my votes go to Bonds, Clemens, Piazza, Biggio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“And I’m trying to say this in the most diplomatic way because I’m not the most diplomatic person. It doesn’t belong to us. It’s like a neighborhood that doesn’t accept anyone under the age of 20 because they’re worried that they’re going to tear the place down. It’s supposed to be a town for everyone. I want to be part of Major League Baseball’s Hall of Fame, but I don’t want to be part of the kind of Hall of Fame that’s based on voters’ beliefs and assumptions.“If you believe I’m a bad person, if you believe I’m a drug person, then I don’t need to be a part of it. If you don’t want to put me in for those reasons then that’s fine. No worries. I’m OK with it. If you want to put me in for what I did as a player, that would be great. I’d love to be in there with everyone else who deserves it.”-Barry Lamar Bonds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hall of fame becomes completely irrelevant if Bonds doesn't go in.

I think it's the exact opposite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think of all the people that are on that list, Clemens and Bonds are no-brainers. Biggio and Schilling would also get serious consideration from me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From 1993-2000 Mike Piazza was top 15 for the MVP every single year... as a catcher... batting in dodger stadium.

His lifetime OPS+ is 143. His 1997 season .362/40/124 was one of the best offensive seasons a catcher has ever had (finished 2nd in MVP).

To me, he was a top 5 player in baseball in his prime and his prime lasted a decade. The only guys challenging him at the time are now mostly busted for PEDs. I think he should be a slam dunk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the PED issues, I think Bonds and Clemens should go in. Even if you throw out their stats from late 90s on, I think they would have been HOFers. Bonds had 3 MVPs to his credit, and Clemens had 3 Cy Youngs by that time (and an MVP).

I'd also give votes to Biggio, Bagwell, Piazza, Raines, and McGriff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the PED issues, I think Bonds and Clemens should go in. Even if you throw out their stats from late 90s on, I think they would have been HOFers. Bonds had 3 MVPs to his credit, and Clemens had 3 Cy Youngs by that time (and an MVP).I'd also give votes to Biggio, Bagwell, Piazza, Raines, and McGriff.

One of the other problems with the "steroid" era is players like McGriff. It appears as though steroids users won't be allowed in but all players are still judged in comparison to their peers including those steroids users.I am fine with letting steriod users in. I just hope that players who would have been HOF with lower normal baselines of elite performance don't get overlooked in the long run. Then there are players like Bagwell and Piazza who are assumed to have taken steroids who are at risk of being blackballed as well. I would rather let a few in that don't deserve it than exclude someone who does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

too subjective? the whole process is subjective.

:goodposting: It's different from MVP or Cy Young where there's a relatively simple criteria and the definitions of the words used aren't really wide open. The Hall has all kind of mushy stuff in the criteria about sportsmanship and character and blah blah blah. They can basically do anything they want and its defensible based on the criteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This article sums it up pretty well:

There are 37 players on the 2013 Hall of Fame ballot. And, over the coming weeks, we will consider all of their candidacies in turn. But there are two players making their debut on the ballot who tower above all of the others, and nothing useful can be said about the Hall of Fame class of 2013 without first considering those two. So let’s talk about Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens.

Bonds and Clemens are two players who, in a just world, would be unanimous selections for induction but who, for reasons discussed earlier today, will almost certainly not make the Hall. Let’s first walk through their obvious baseball qualifications for the Hall — and bear with me, because I will assume in this first part that the performance enhancing drug issues don’t exist — and then deal with those pesky objections so many have to their candidacy.

The Baseball Bonafides

While it’s always hard to compare players between eras, it is not hyperbole to say that Bonds and Clemens would be finalists in a contest to name the greatest hitter and the greatest pitcher who ever lived. We all think we know how great they were because their careers just wound up five years ago, but even the most dedicated baseball fan can be shocked to take a look back over their stat sheets to see just how thoroughly they dominated their era.

I won’t go into hardcore statistics with you, but let’s just see where Barry Bonds resides on the leader board in various categories:

[*]He’s the all-time home run king;

[*]He’s the all-time walk king and the all-time intentional walk king

[*]Third all-time in runs scored;

[*]Third all-time in wins above replacement (WAR);

[*]Sixth all-time in on-base percentage;

[*]Sixth all-time in slugging percentage;

[*]Fourth all-time in OPS (on-base plus slugging) and Third all-time in adjusted OPS (which weights for era and ballpark);

[*]Second all-time in extra base hits;

[*]Fourth all-time in total bases;

[*]Fourth all-time in RBI;

[*]Second all-time in total times on base; and

[*]He’s the single-season record holder for home runs and base-on-balls (actually he holds the top three seasons in base-on-balls)

[*]In addition, he has the record for most MVP awards (seven) and probably deserved to win the MVP a couple more times, most notably 1991. And he wasn’t all bat, either. He holds the all-time record for putouts by a left fielder, won eight Gold Gloves and stole 514 bases.

How about Roger Clemens?

[*]Third all-time in strikeouts (4,672)

[*]Ninth all-time in wins (354), but third among pitchers who didn’t spend the bulk of their career in the deadball era;

[*]Sixteenth all-time in innings pitched, but ninth among non-deadballers;

[*]Seventh all-time in games started;

[*]Third all-time in WAR for pitchers;

[*]Tenth all-time in adjusted ERA+ (which is analogous to OPS+ in that it weights for era); and

[*]First in several other complex era-adjusting statistics such as runs saved, win probability and the like.

[*]Like Bonds and his MVPs, Clemens has seven Cy Young Awards and arguments for more. He also has one MVP award of his own.

When you look merely at their production and their dominance, the number of hitters better than Barry Bonds and the number of pitchers better than Roger Clemens in all of baseball history can be counted on one hand. Comparing Bonds and Clemens to people like Babe Ruth, Willie Mays, Ted Williams and Walter Johnson is not just not hyperbole. It’s absolutely necessary, for their like has rarely if ever been seen in the game of baseball. Put simply, they are immortals.

But their baseball exploits are not the end of the story, obviously.

Bonds, Clemens and Performance Enhancing Drugs

While Clemens and (to some extent ) Bonds continue to either deny or play down their use of PEDs, and while the criminal prosecutions against them were either misguided, unsuccessful or both, it is simply obtuse to believe that they weren’t significant PED users. Bonds’ use was painstakingly documented in the 2007 book “Game of Shadows.” Clemens’ use is far less clear cut, but just because the Justice Department couldn’t convict him of lying about it under oath doesn’t mean that we have to assume he never did it. For our purposes here, let’s make the exceedingly safe assumption that he did.

Bonds and Clemens use of PEDs will, for many, disqualify them from Hall of Fame consideration out of hand. The reason they won’t get 75% of the vote and induction on this year’s ballot is because far, far more than 25% of the Hall of Fame electorate believes that anyone who used PEDs should not be in the Hall of Fame, full stop. Many if not most fans feel this way too, as do no small amount of current and former major leaguers.

But should this be so? Absolutely not. And to explain why, I will take on the arguments commonly made against their induction one-by-one:

Argument: Bonds and Clemens may have amazing stats, but those stats were bogus due to their PED use.

Response: Sure, to some extent their statistics were inflated. But by how much? When did Bonds start using? When did Clemens start using? If, as is almost universally agreed-upon, it was during the middle-to-late years of their career, how were they so dominant early on as well? Bonds won three MVP awards before the “Game of Shadows” authors believed he began using. Clemens had an MVP, three Cy Young Awards and was generally considered the best pitcher in the game before his chief accuser, former trainer Brian McNamee, claims he began using PEDs. If you stopped their careers the day before they picked up their first syringes, they’d be first-ballot Hall of Famers.

But even taking their whole careers in, it is lunacy to suggest that, inflated or not, Bonds and Clemens weren’t vastly superior to their competition. Hundreds if not thousands of major leaguers took PEDs during the 1980s, 90s and early 2000s. Many of them, by the way, were pitchers who faced Bonds and hitters who faced Clemens. But that aside, no one matched Bonds’ and Clemens’ performance. It’s obvious why: the E in PEDs stands for “enhancing,” not “creating,” and thus one cannot ignore the fact that Bonds and Clemens were unique and historic talents who, even if the final tallies on their stat sheets should be somewhat discounted, clearly would have been among the all-time greats without the juice.

Argument: You can’t just discount their stats. Bonds and Clemens cheated, cheating is wrong, and thus they should be excluded.

Response: Cheating is wrong, no question. But Hall of Fame voting is not a rule-enforcement mechanism or a court of law. That’s the job of the Joint Drug Program agreed upon between the league and the union. If someone breaks the drug rules and gets caught and gets punished, it’s up to the league to punish them, not baseball writers who comprise the electorate.

But that little technicality aside, the Hall of Fame has long welcomed cheaters with open arms, and no current rule says that a cheater, be he a drug cheater or otherwise, can’t be allowed in (I’ll get to the issue of character in a minute). Gaylord Perry threw a spitball. Don Sutton and Whitey Ford (and probably almost every other pitcher in history) scuffed or cut balls. Scores of batters corked their bats. The 1951 Giants won the pennant after rigging up an elaborate, electric sign-stealing mechanism. John McGraw, both as a player and a manager, invented and carried out more ways to break rules than anyone in history, ranging from umpire distracting and cutting the corners on bases and tripping or obstructing opposing runners. Ty Cobb sharpened his spikes in an effort to maim opposing players who would dare try to tag him out. While we single out the 1919 White Sox as a unique stain on the game, many players — including Hall of Famers — fixed baseball games prior to the Black Sox scandal.

While many have attempted to argue that using PEDs is different in kind than all of those other examples — examples which are often laughed off as quirky or colorful — the fact is that there are PED users in the Hall of Fame already. Only, instead of steroids, they used amphetamines or “greenies” as they were called. Players who have either admitted to or have been credibly accused of taking such things include Pete Rose, Mike Schmidt, Mickey Mantle, Ted Williams, Hank Aaron and Willie Mays. And this leaves out all of the drug and/or alcohol users who took things which hindered their performance, which also impacted the competitive nature of the game, albeit adversely to their team’s interests. And it also assumes that there are no steroid users already in the Hall of Fame, which I do not believe is a reasonable assumption.

The common thread here: all of these examples of baseball cheating involved players breaking rules in an effort to gain some sort of edge on the competition. Rule breaking that, in turn, put the competition in the unenviable position of having to decide if they too should break the rules to keep up.

The point here isn’t that two wrongs make a right. The point is that the Hall of Fame has never cared about wrongs in the first place. Why it should start caring about them now is beyond me.

Argument: The Hall of Fame ballot has a character clause on it, and even if the past cheaters were let in, voters are nonetheless obligated to abide by the character clause now and keep Bonds and Clemens out.

Response: Yes, the Hall of Fame ballot has a character clause. It reads like this:

“Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contribution to the team(s) on which the player played.”

It should be noted, though, that this clause was not invented to keep bad seeds out. It was invented to let good eggs in, even if they weren’t quite up to Hall of Fame standards otherwise. It was designed to be a bonus, not a detriment. Specifically, as Bill James argued in his seminal book “Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame,” the clause was written by baseball commissioner Kennesaw Mountain Landis in an effort to get a player named Eddie Grant inducted into the Hall on the basis of his heroism in World War I (Grant was killed in action in Lorraine, France). The attempt to get Grant inducted never worked — he just wasn’t a good enough player — but the clause stuck.

It stuck despite the fact that character — like cheating — has never been true criteria for Hall of Fame induction. The Hall is filled with racists, segregationists, cheaters, drug users, criminals both convicted and merely accused, and depending on how you view Tom Yawkey’s treatment of former Red Sox trainer Donald J. Fitzpatrick, an argument can be made that an enabler of sexual abuse has a plaque in Cooperstown as well. Heck, as Joe Posnanski noted a few years ago, way back in the 1930s a guy who murdered his wife and children got a couple of Hall of Fame votes.

But the point here isn’t exactly the same “well, other bad seeds are in the Hall” point mentioned above. It’s more about how irrelevant the clause is to one’s prowess or fame as a baseball player and, more to the point, how ill-equipped baseball writers are at judging a player’s character. Indeed, the presence of all of those bad seeds shows how ill-equipped they are. The clause was always there, yet those guys got the votes. It’s possible this was the case because all of the writers accidentally forgot to apply the voting rules. It’s far more likely, however, that the writers, in their wisdom, realized that they were in no position to look into the hearts of men and judge their moral worth. It’s something that some writers are now starting to realize about the PED crowd. It’s something they all should do.

Conclusion

In the final analysis, I hope we can all agree that there is no baseball reason whatsoever to keep Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens out of the Hall of Fame. Their baseball accomplishments — both those which can be measured by statistics and those which cannot — are so far beyond sufficient for induction that it’s almost laughable to list them. To oppose their candidacy, then, one must make a moral or ethical case based on their drug use and the voter’s opinion of their character. And that case will almost certainly be made from a great distance and with imperfect information.

You may feel comfortable doing such a thing. I do not. And I believe that any Hall of Fame that does not include two of the best players to ever swing a bat or throw a ball, no matter what their flaws, is an utter joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the HOF is in a no-win situation here. a large segment is going to be ticked off whichever way this turns out. i think it's the most interesting election at least since the 1st one, and perhaps ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the HOF is in a no-win situation here. a large segment is going to be ticked off whichever way this turns out. i think it's the most interesting election at least since the 1st one, and perhaps ever.

:goodposting: That said for me if Bonds and Clemens don't get in, I think it's a joke. PEDs or no PEDs they impacted the game like few others did over time and each would have been deserving of the HOF without PEDs (Assuming they both started in the early 2000s). PED Bonds is the greatest hitter I've ever seen.Non PED Bonds was one of the most dynamic all-around players I've ever seen.PED Clemens extended his career and boosted his numbersNon-PED Clemens was the best pitcher of his generation (well maybe Big Unit, but it's close)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the HOF is in a no-win situation here. a large segment is going to be ticked off whichever way this turns out. i think it's the most interesting election at least since the 1st one, and perhaps ever.

:goodposting: That said for me if Bonds and Clemens don't get in, I think it's a joke. PEDs or no PEDs they impacted the game like few others did over time and each would have been deserving of the HOF without PEDs (Assuming they both started in the early 2000s). PED Bonds is the greatest hitter I've ever seen.Non PED Bonds was one of the most dynamic all-around players I've ever seen.PED Clemens extended his career and boosted his numbersNon-PED Clemens was the best pitcher of his generation (well maybe Big Unit, but it's close)
:goodposting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This will be the most controversial election in m lifetime. If no one gets in this year, I will not be surprised. If Bonds, Clemens, Biggio, and Piazza get in, I will not be surprised. In reality, they should all be judged against players of their era, when most of these players used PEDs. In my opinion, none of them should get in. You cheated, got away with it, and had an unfair advantage over other players who did not use.

Most importantly, I do not get a vote!! I think once one of these suspected/Mitchell Report/or tested positive for use players get in, the rest will and should get in. I just think it won't happen this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biggio and piazza are no brainers. A friend that worked for the Astros for 7 years told me once that he knew a lot of voters and almost all told him they wanted biggio in before bag well.

Bonds and Clemens have to get in. The hof is a museum of history, whatever that history is. They can't ignore 20 years of baseball on some high moral ground. Bonds is one of the three best hitters EVER. Same for Clemens on the pitching side. If I take my kid to the hof and have to explain who Barry bonds (my favorite player, admittedly) is in the parking lot than the museum of baseball history has failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the HOF is in a no-win situation here. a large segment is going to be ticked off whichever way this turns out. i think it's the most interesting election at least since the 1st one, and perhaps ever.

:goodposting: That said for me if Bonds and Clemens don't get in, I think it's a joke. PEDs or no PEDs they impacted the game like few others did over time and each would have been deserving of the HOF without PEDs (Assuming they both started in the early 2000s). PED Bonds is the greatest hitter I've ever seen.Non PED Bonds was one of the most dynamic all-around players I've ever seen.PED Clemens extended his career and boosted his numbersNon-PED Clemens was the best pitcher of his generation (well maybe Big Unit, but it's close)
Its not a problem for me, I think we know they SHOULD be in, but its more of a message through punitive choice. Pete Rose SHOULD be in, but he's not. The burden of the hall is, these players did incredible damage to the legacy of the game, and their trasngressions should not be rewarded for perpetuity with no comment on their conduct.What the Hall needs to do now though, is figure out some consistent standard. To me its either:a. they never get in, bottom line, across the board, foreverb. they go in a scarlet letter wing (which I don't like)c. the "suspected" can go in with a penalty for revocation. To me, the crime is not to Bonds and Clemens who have functioned with such disgusting avarice, they have removed any personal sympathy I might have. Its to guys like Bagwell and Piazza, who have been the victim of whispers, and who I think quite probably did use, but have never been implicated in anything as strong as the Mitchell Report. The Hall should not leave those guys in purgatory. They should go in, knowing they could be removed if infomration comes to light down the line. Edited by Smack Tripper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The burden of the hall is, these players did incredible damage to the legacy of the game, and their transgressions should not be rewarded for perpetuity with no comment on their conduct.

if one reads this comment in isolation, we might wonder whether it refers to Landis/Cobb/et al and their racism that kept blacks out of the game for so long, or perhaps Perry/et all for doctoring baseballs, or the guys from the 60s/70s who did greenies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the HOF is in a no-win situation here. a large segment is going to be ticked off whichever way this turns out. i think it's the most interesting election at least since the 1st one, and perhaps ever.

:goodposting: That said for me if Bonds and Clemens don't get in, I think it's a joke. PEDs or no PEDs they impacted the game like few others did over time and each would have been deserving of the HOF without PEDs (Assuming they both started in the early 2000s). PED Bonds is the greatest hitter I've ever seen.Non PED Bonds was one of the most dynamic all-around players I've ever seen.PED Clemens extended his career and boosted his numbersNon-PED Clemens was the best pitcher of his generation (well maybe Big Unit, but it's close)
Maddox is better than Big Unit or non-PED Clemens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biggio and piazza are no brainers. A friend that worked for the Astros for 7 years told me once that he knew a lot of voters and almost all told him they wanted biggio in before bag well.Bonds and Clemens have to get in. The hof is a museum of history, whatever that history is. They can't ignore 20 years of baseball on some high moral ground. Bonds is one of the three best hitters EVER. Same for Clemens on the pitching side. If I take my kid to the hof and have to explain who Barry bonds (my favorite player, admittedly) is in the parking lot than the museum of baseball history has failed.

Thats insane. Bagwell is maybe the 5th best first baseman ever. The vote for him last year was criminal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the HOF is in a no-win situation here. a large segment is going to be ticked off whichever way this turns out. i think it's the most interesting election at least since the 1st one, and perhaps ever.

:goodposting: That said for me if Bonds and Clemens don't get in, I think it's a joke. PEDs or no PEDs they impacted the game like few others did over time and each would have been deserving of the HOF without PEDs (Assuming they both started in the early 2000s). PED Bonds is the greatest hitter I've ever seen.Non PED Bonds was one of the most dynamic all-around players I've ever seen.PED Clemens extended his career and boosted his numbersNon-PED Clemens was the best pitcher of his generation (well maybe Big Unit, but it's close)
Its not a problem for me, I think we know they SHOULD be in, but its more of a message through punitive choice. Pete Rose SHOULD be in, but he's not. The burden of the hall is, these players did incredible damage to the legacy of the game, and their trasngressions should not be rewarded for perpetuity with no comment on their conduct.What the Hall needs to do now though, is figure out some consistent standard. To me its either:a. they never get in, bottom line, across the board, foreverb. they go in a scarlet letter wing (which I don't like)c. the "suspected" can go in with a penalty for revocation. To me, the crime is not to Bonds and Clemens who have functioned with such disgusting avarice, they have removed any personal sympathy I might have. Its to guys like Bagwell and Piazza, who have been the victim of whispers, and who I think quite probably did use, but have never been implicated in anything as strong as the Mitchell Report. The Hall should not leave those guys in purgatory. They should go in, knowing they could be removed if infomration comes to light down the line.
The HOF is a museum. There is plenty in it about steroids. And Rose is not eligible. Bonds, Clemens, et al are eligible.No one has ever been removed from the HOF, despite it being filled with racists, spitballers, and PED users. I fail to see why steroids/HGH is so much worse than these other transgressions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Umpire Hank O’Day, Yankees owner Jacob Ruppert and 19th Century catcher/third baseman Deacon White have been elected to the National Baseball Hall of Fame by the Pre-Integration Era Committee, it was announced today. O’Day, Ruppert and White were each named on the necessary 75 percent of all ballots cast by the 16-member Pre-Integration Era Committee, which considered a ballot of six former players, three executives and one umpire whose contributions to the game were most significant from baseball origins through 1946. The Pre-Integration Era Committee held meetings on Sunday in Nashville, Tenn., site of Baseball’s Winter Meetings. O’Day, Ruppert and White will be joined in the Hall of Fame Class of 2013 by any electees who emerge from the Baseball Writers’ Association of America voting, which will be announced on Wednesday, Jan. 9. All three electees are deceased. The 16-member Pre-Integration Era Committee was comprised of Hall of Fame members Bert Blyleven, Pat Gillick, Phil Niekro and Don Sutton; major league executives Bill DeWitt, Roland Hemond, Gary Hughes and Bob Watson; and veteran media members and historians Jim Henneman, Steve Hirdt, Peter Morris, Phil Pepe, Tom Simon, Claire Smith, T.R. Sullivan and Mark Whicker. Hall of Fame Chairman of the Board Jane Forbes Clark served as the non-voting chairman of the Pre-Integration Era Committee. Results of the Pre-Integration Era Ballot (12 votes needed for election): Jacob Ruppert (15 votes, 93.8%); Hank O’Day (15 votes, 93.8%); Deacon White (14 votes, 87.5%); Bill Dahlen (10 votes, 62.5%); Sam Breadon, Wes Ferrell, Marty Marion, Tony Mullane, Alfred Reach and Bucky Walters each received three votes or less.

White was born during the James Polk administration Edited by Eephus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Umpire Hank O’Day, Yankees owner Jacob Ruppert and 19th Century catcher/third baseman Deacon White have been elected to the National Baseball Hall of Fame by the Pre-Integration Era Committee, it was announced today. O’Day, Ruppert and White were each named on the necessary 75 percent of all ballots cast by the 16-member Pre-Integration Era Committee, which considered a ballot of six former players, three executives and one umpire whose contributions to the game were most significant from baseball origins through 1946. The Pre-Integration Era Committee held meetings on Sunday in Nashville, Tenn., site of Baseball’s Winter Meetings. O’Day, Ruppert and White will be joined in the Hall of Fame Class of 2013 by any electees who emerge from the Baseball Writers’ Association of America voting, which will be announced on Wednesday, Jan. 9. All three electees are deceased. The 16-member Pre-Integration Era Committee was comprised of Hall of Fame members Bert Blyleven, Pat Gillick, Phil Niekro and Don Sutton; major league executives Bill DeWitt, Roland Hemond, Gary Hughes and Bob Watson; and veteran media members and historians Jim Henneman, Steve Hirdt, Peter Morris, Phil Pepe, Tom Simon, Claire Smith, T.R. Sullivan and Mark Whicker. Hall of Fame Chairman of the Board Jane Forbes Clark served as the non-voting chairman of the Pre-Integration Era Committee. Results of the Pre-Integration Era Ballot (12 votes needed for election): Jacob Ruppert (15 votes, 93.8%); Hank O’Day (15 votes, 93.8%); Deacon White (14 votes, 87.5%); Bill Dahlen (10 votes, 62.5%); Sam Breadon, Wes Ferrell, Marty Marion, Tony Mullane, Alfred Reach and Bucky Walters each received three votes or less.

White was born during the James Polk administration
Deacon White?!?! Whose #### does Dahlen have to suck to get into the HOF? #deadballworldproblems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love this story from Deacon White's Wikipedia page:

According to Lee Allen in The National League Story (1961), White was one of the last people to believe that the earth is flat. He tried and failed to convince his teammates that they were living on a flat plane and not a globe; they ridiculed him. Then one asked to be convinced, and the Deacon gave him an argument suited to the hypothesis that the earth is not really turning. He convinced the teammate but the argument would not prove that the earth is not a sphere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love this story from Deacon White's Wikipedia page:

According to Lee Allen in The National League Story (1961), White was one of the last people to believe that the earth is flat. He tried and failed to convince his teammates that they were living on a flat plane and not a globe; they ridiculed him. Then one asked to be convinced, and the Deacon gave him an argument suited to the hypothesis that the earth is not really turning. He convinced the teammate but the argument would not prove that the earth is not a sphere.

...and another

In 1889, White and teammate Jack Rowe were sold to the Pittsburgh Alleghenys, but the pair refused to report unless they were paid additional money, leading to a protracted dispute. Eventually the two men were paid, with White telling a reporter, "We appreciate the money, but we ain't worth it. Rowe's arm is gone. I'm over 40 and my fielding ain't so good, though I can still hit some. But I will say this. No man is going to sell my carcass unless I get half."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the BBWAA election rules:

5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

Their stats only count for half of the criteria. :popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the BBWAA election rules:

5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

Their stats only count for half of the criteria. :popcorn:

Deacon White was kind of a #### but you'd be amazed at how many people were in the 1880s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the BBWAA election rules:

5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

Their stats only count for half of the criteria. :popcorn:

Surely was an impediment to Cobb, Gibson, Sutton, and Aaron :rolleyes:

I guess you'll be clamoring for John Olreud to get in. And why isn't Sean Casey in then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the BBWAA election rules:

5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

Their stats only count for half of the criteria. :popcorn:

do you know why/when those phrases were added to the criteria? It was after WW2, when there was a push to get some of the war heroes elected to the HOF (who otherwise had no shot). It didn't work.

That said, i agree with their inclusion, even though they tend to provide a writer with an excuse for not voting for someone clearly qualified by their performance on the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the BBWAA election rules:

5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

Their stats only count for half of the criteria. :popcorn:

Surely was an impediment to Cobb, Gibson, Sutton, and Aaron :rolleyes:

I guess you'll be clamoring for John Olreud to get in. And why isn't Sean Casey in then?

Why is Albert belle out and Kirby Puckett in( despite puck's later known transgressions)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the BBWAA election rules:

5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

Their stats only count for half of the criteria. :popcorn:

Surely was an impediment to Cobb, Gibson, Sutton, and Aaron :rolleyes:

I guess you'll be clamoring for John Olreud to get in. And why isn't Sean Casey in then?

Why is Albert belle out and Kirby Puckett in( despite puck's later known transgressions)
All the writers hated Albert and they loved Kirby and his story. So, unless by character you mean how the writers got along with a player, for no reason in that clause whatsoever. Edited by dparker713

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom Cheek wins Ford C. Frick award! A few years too late but great to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice Joe Posnanski piece about fifteen players on their first HoF ballot this year who are unlikely to see their second.

worth reading. nothing groundbreaking here, but nice capsules of each player. fun trip down memory lane for anyone that's been playing roto for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.