Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, chasfh said:

I ask because Jeter had a much better career in the majors, and was also broadly more popular than Ichiro. Fans practically wanted to hunt down the lone voter and destroy his life over it.

The way I see it, Ichiro got one of the greatest vote totals in history and that should be celebrated.

If I was a voter, Jeter and Ichiro are both no brainer first ballot HOFers.  In my opinion, Ichiro (among several others) was a more complete high level player among all facets of the game—and reached significant milestones despite not coming to MLB until he was 27.  If Ichiro starts in the MLB at 21, he’s the hit king.  Jeter was a superior power hitter, but he benefitted heavily from many years of all-star hitters behind him and his defense was actually quite a negative.  

Edited by monkeytargets39
  • Like 1
Posted

Do I think Ichiro should have been unanimous? Sure but I don't think him not getting it is anymore egregious than countless others that didn't. 

IF you're solely looking at his MLB career you can come up with reasons why you didnt vote for him on the first ballot. He only made the playoffs one time while in his prime, only once finished in the top 7 in MVP voting in his career(his rookie year where he won), didn't hit for power, nor draw a ton of walks and finished with a relatively pedestrian 107 OPS+.

Would I hold stuff like that against him? No, not at all but historically there have been voters that critique 1st ballot guys especially harshly and look at any possible setback not to vote for them and in their eyes those things could be possible setbacks. Might not be fair but again there have been better guys that voters didn't vote for their first time. 

  • Like 1
Posted

Do I think Ichiro should have been unanimous? Sure but I don't think him not getting it is anymore egregious than countless others that didn't. 

IF you're solely looking at his MLB career you can come up with reasons why you didnt vote for him on the first ballot. He only made the playoffs one time while in his prime, only once finished in the top 7 in MVP voting in his career(his rookie year where he won), didn't hit for power, nor draw a ton of walks and finished with a relatively pedestrian 107 OPS+.

Would I hold stuff like that against him? No, not at all but historically there have been voters that critique 1st ballot guys especially harshly and look at any possible setback not to vote for them and in their eyes those things could be possible setbacks. Might not be fair but again there have been better guys that voters didn't vote for their first time. 

Posted

Robo umpires coming to a spring training game near you this season. Looks as if they’re going with the challenge system this spring. Sort of old news but I had forgotten this. 

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, RandyMarsh said:

Do I think Ichiro should have been unanimous? Sure but I don't think him not getting it is anymore egregious than countless others that didn't. 

IF you're solely looking at his MLB career you can come up with reasons why you didnt vote for him on the first ballot. He only made the playoffs one time while in his prime, only once finished in the top 7 in MVP voting in his career(his rookie year where he won), didn't hit for power, nor draw a ton of walks and finished with a relatively pedestrian 107 OPS+.

Would I hold stuff like that against him? No, not at all but historically there have been voters that critique 1st ballot guys especially harshly and look at any possible setback not to vote for them and in their eyes those things could be possible setbacks. Might not be fair but again there have been better guys that voters didn't vote for their first time. 

Right, Suzuki is a definite Hall of Famer, but not being unanimous is not some big injustice. Babe Ruth, Hank Aaron, Ty Cobb, Joe Dimaggio, Mickey Mantle, Stan Musial and Ken Griffey Jr were all outfielders and were not unanimous.  He is not in that class.  

Posted
22 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Right, Suzuki is a definite Hall of Famer, but not being unanimous is not some big injustice. Babe Ruth, Hank Aaron, Ty Cobb, Joe Dimaggio, Mickey Mantle, Stan Musial and Ken Griffey Jr were all outfielders and were not unanimous.  He is not in that class.  

All of those guys should’ve been unanimous though.  What more could you possibly need from any of them?

  • Thanks 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said:

All of those guys should’ve been unanimous though.  What more could you possibly need from any of them?

Yes, they should have been.  Suzuki probably should have been too, but if someone only looked at his MLB career and disregarded his record in Japan, I could MAYBE see how they would have excluded him.    

Posted
1 hour ago, monkeytargets39 said:

All of those guys should’ve been unanimous though.  What more could you possibly need from any of them?

For a long time there was confusion on when players were eligible.  DiMaggio wasn’t even a first ballot guy. The voting process wasn’t as laid out as it is today. 

Posted
Just now, oblong said:

For a long time there was confusion on when players were eligible.  DiMaggio wasn’t even a first ballot guy. The voting process wasn’t as laid out as it is today. 

Yeah I can understand that….but once you get to modern day, non-controversial superstars….what’s the logic?  Like once Albert Pujols becomes eligible….what could possibly be the argument for him to not be unanimous?  


Yet I’m sure they’re will be one guy out there who will see an opportunity to insert himself into the storyline….

Posted

Carlos Beltran finished with 70% on his 3rd year on the ballot. He has a higher career WAR than Ichiro, higher JAWS score, higher peak 7, higher OPS+, scored more runs, driven in more guys and carried a team in the postseason to the World Series. 

Posted
13 minutes ago, RandyMarsh said:

Carlos Beltran finished with 70% on his 3rd year on the ballot. He has a higher career WAR than Ichiro, higher JAWS score, higher peak 7, higher OPS+, scored more runs, driven in more guys and carried a team in the postseason to the World Series. 

Yeah, Beltran is another who should be in with Lou and Schilling. He has 400+ home runs, 300+ stolen bases, 2700+ hits, obp .350, 9x all-star, ROY, 3 gold gloves.

Posted (edited)

I will never get the idea why a guy who was one of the architects of the sign-stealing scandal should be given the red carpet treatment in Cooperstown. Beltran was, in fact, the only named player in the report. Nevertheless, because of their defense of the whole thing, and their subsequent apologies for participating in it only once they saw the jig was up, I will root against Altuve when he gets on the ballot, and if they get that far, against Bregman and Correa as well.

 

Edited by chasfh
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I will never get the idea why a guy who was one of the architects of the sign-stealing scandal should be given the red carpet treatment in Cooperstown. Beltran was, in fact, the only named player in the report. Nevertheless, because of their defense of the whole thing, and their subsequent apologies for participating in it only once they saw the jig was up, I will root against Altuve when he gets on the ballot, and if they get that far, against Bregman and Correa as well.

 

Fair enough, I forgot/didn't realize that he was so involved in it. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I will never get the idea why a guy who was one of the architects of the sign-stealing scandal should be given the red carpet treatment in Cooperstown. Beltran was, in fact, the only named player in the report. Nevertheless, because of their defense of the whole thing, and their subsequent apologies for participating in it only once they saw the jig was up, I will root against Altuve when he gets on the ballot, and if they get that far, against Bregman and Correa as well.

 

At least with the PED scandal, that stuff was potentially available to any player.

in my opinion, the Astros scandal is worse than that.

  • Like 2
Posted
16 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said:

At least with the PED scandal, that stuff was potentially available to any player.

in my opinion, the Astros scandal is worse than that.

I agree. I have always been skeptical of how much PEDs even helps players do better at baseball and, not for nothing, Baseball has no interest either in pursuing the question if they haven’t, or publishing the results if they have. But using home-cooked technology to steal signs during a game is a clear and unambiguous undermining of competitive fairness. 

  • Like 1
Posted
11 hours ago, monkeytargets39 said:

Yeah I can understand that….but once you get to modern day, non-controversial superstars….what’s the logic?  Like once Albert Pujols becomes eligible….what could possibly be the argument for him to not be unanimous?  


Yet I’m sure they’re will be one guy out there who will see an opportunity to insert himself into the storyline….

The only justifiable position is because of the 10 player limit a voter wants to help a borderline player with totals, assuming the guy like Pujols doesn’t need their vote. Otherwise the focus on first ballot or unanimous is silly. 
A guy with 75% is just as much of a HOFer as the 100% guy. 

Posted (edited)

I’ll be curious to see how next years ballot plays out and also what you all think when looking at it.

Personally I only see 4-5 guys that I think belong in.  Not sure there’s another 5-6 that are worth throwing votes on to help keep on the ballot.  


I would vote for: Andruw, A-Rod, Manny, Utley and Felix Hernandez

I could be possibly be convinced on voting for Abreu, Vizquel and K-Rod

Out on Beltran and Pettitte

Edited by monkeytargets39
Posted

Since the Braves were always on TBS back in the 90s I think I watched them more than I did the Tigers then and in his prime Andruw Jones is the best CF I have ever seen. I probably would've voted for him on the first ballot. 

Posted
19 hours ago, monkeytargets39 said:

Anyone else baffled by the Guardians offseason to this point?  

 

I’m assuming they are working from a very tight budget.  Or might be waiting for prices to drop as free agents get nervous.

Posted
48 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

I’m assuming they are working from a very tight budget.  Or might be waiting for prices to drop as free agents get nervous.

They’ve lost Cobb, Boyd, Naylor, Gimenez, Mogan, Sandlin, Horwitz, Straw, and Karnichak and basically all they’ve brought in was Carlos Santana.

Posted
8 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

Rangers decide to create their own RSN in wake of Bally bankruptcy.

 

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/43589961/rangers-make-network-produce-distribute-game-broadcasts

I was hoping this might happen with the Tigers, or better yet, MLB takes over the broadcast the way they did with the Pirates, Brewers, etc. Instead, we may have to see shifting odds with every pitch on the FanDuel network. Hoping not.

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.


  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      291
    • Most Online
      704

    Newest Member
    alkalinebatteries
    Joined
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...