Jump to content

HOF Ballots


CMRivdogs

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I enjoy seeing all the negativity here about Ortiz.  I think he is legit, but he was probably about the 9th best player on the ballot and has some of the same character flaws as those who were better.  It's funny because everybody in Boston thinks he is greatest thing ever and I was hoping he'd have to wait his turn.  

One of my good buddies here in Chicago is from Boston and is totally jacked that Ortiz got voted in. He’s going to Cooperstown for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ortiz is one of my least favorite players.

but what is really galling is the hypocrisy.  if steroids are keeping clemens, bonds, and arod out (who are all much better than ortiz) then how is fat papi in?

its a joke.

but its the hall of fame.  the hall of fame has been a joke for a while.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cruzer1 said:

 

I wonder whether Tucker is thinking about Pete. He did play in Cincinnati so probably heard a lot more positive spin than most do.

An institution that purports to honor the greatest players of all time but purposely keeps out some who are at the top of the list on a discretionary basis for squishy moral reasons, while letting in others who have the same squishy moral issues, has a credibility problem.

But hey, isn’t that Baseball in spades over the past couple decades or so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I wonder whether Tucker is thinking about Pete. He did play in Cincinnati so probably heard a lot more positive spin than most do.

An institution that purports to honor the greatest players of all time but purposely keeps out some who are at the top of the list on a discretionary basis for squishy moral reasons, while letting in others who have the same squishy moral issues, has a credibility problem.

But hey, isn’t that Baseball in spades over the past couple decades or so?

Barnhart is absolutely correct. The MLB HOF is a joke and completely irrelevant if the all time hits and HR leader aren't it.  Its time that players are voted in by their peers and not a bunch of biased writers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Archie said:

Barnhart is absolutely correct. The MLB HOF is a joke and completely irrelevant if the all time hits and HR leader aren't it.  Its time that players are voted in by their peers and not a bunch of biased writers.

Their peers are the ones who put Harold Baines in the Hall of Fame.  

The writers are fine, but they need to get rid of the ones that don't take it seriously.  If they haven't covered the game for ten years, they shouldn't be voting.  

Edited by Tiger337
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Their peers are the ones who put Harold Baines in the Hall of Fame.  

The writers are fine, but they need to get rid of the ones that don't take it seriously.  If they haven't covered the game for ten years, they shouldn't be voting.  

its more than that, its a generational thing.  the older sports writer (i.e.: hacks) still vote based on who they liked or perceived morality bullshit and less on stats (see phil rogers voting for buerhle and ortiz for the hall of fame and not bonds or clemens).

the next generation will likely vote more on stats and will have other moral bugaboos (likely liberal social issues) and will not consider peds as a hindrance like their older brethren.

living in chicago and having to deal with phil rogers, joe cowley, and paul sullivan over the years just highlights how stupid most baseball writers are.  like you guys and mccoskey.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, buddha said:

its more than that, its a generational thing.  the older sports writer (i.e.: hacks) still vote based on who they liked or perceived morality bullshit and less on stats (see phil rogers voting for buerhle and ortiz for the hall of fame and not bonds or clemens).

the next generation will likely vote more on stats and will have other moral bugaboos (likely liberal social issues) and will not consider peds as a hindrance like their older brethren.

living in chicago and having to deal with phil rogers, joe cowley, and paul sullivan over the years just highlights how stupid most baseball writers are.  like you guys and mccoskey.

You can't weed them all out.  So, what's the solution?  Use a statistical algorithm?  Maybe, they can have a statistical algorithm to make sure all the best players get in.  Then they can have a ballot where the writers can vote for the borderline guys that don't get in statistically. 

Rank voting might yield better results too.  Make the writers rank every eligible player and then add up the ranks.  Any writer that is not disqualifying Bonds will probably give him a really high rank and he might end up doing better than Ortiz.  If any writers think that is too much work, they don't have to vote.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that this means anything or is a free pass for those that didn't vote for them but I'm just curious I wonder if guys like Bonds or Clemens really care if they are in the Hall of Fame?

Like in some borderline guys cases they probably love the feeling of being recognized, their legacy getting immortalized and for some perhaps bigger pay days at autograph signings but I'm not sure any of that really applies to Clemens or Bonds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

Interesting.. 

image.thumb.png.8c150643754a464b41273b51c0b98e1d.png

The crazy one for me is Vizquel—the number of private ballots that didn’t seem to care about his abuse allegations—wonder how many didn’t offer a vote for Bonds, Clemens, etc…

potentially one way to fix voting is to drive more accountability and require all ballots made public.

Edited by Tenacious D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

Interesting.. 

image.thumb.png.8c150643754a464b41273b51c0b98e1d.png

Another thing I'd like to see them do is require that all ballots be public.  The private ballots tend to be writers that don't vote for many players.  This is not a presidential election.  It's sports.  You would think that sports writers would want to make their votes public and talk about them.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

The crazy one for me is Vizquel—the number of private ballots that didn’t seem to care about his abuse allegations—wonder how many didn’t offer a vote for Bonds, Clemens, etc…

potentially one way to fix voting is to drive more accountability and require all ballots made public.

Oh I see you already said that!  I was just looking at the chart.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, buddha said:

i dont care about vizquel's allegations either.  its a museum to talk about the best baseball players, not about a bunch of saints.

I don't care either.  It makes me dislike him as a person, but it has nothing to do with his baseball performance.  I wouldn't have voted for him because he wasn't that great of a plyer.  I think Schilling is the biggest dick ever and I still would have voted for him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tiger337 said:

I don't care either.  It makes me dislike him as a person, but it has nothing to do with his baseball performance.  I wouldn't have voted for him because he wasn't that great of a plyer.  I think Schilling is the biggest dick ever and I still would have voted for him.  

exactly.

bonds seems like a total jerk but he's the best hitter in baseball history and belongs in the hall of freaking fame.

somebody voted for justin morneau and aj pierzynski for god's sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, buddha said:

i dont care about vizquel's allegations either.  its a museum to talk about the best baseball players, not about a bunch of saints.

just to play Devil's advocate - I can say you can look up who the best statistical players were on any baseball stat site - they will have their places right at the top - you don't need a museum for that to be confirmed or recognized. Being in or out of Cooperstown wont change anyone's understanding of what kind of hitter Barry Bonds was.

Ergo - save the museum for the people the sport wants to 'celebrate' - with all the texture that term might imply.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...