ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Baseball Hall of Fame

Pitt2009

Freshman
Dec 24, 2015
1,166
872
113
First, congrats to two former Yankees, CC and Ichiro. Congrats to Billy Wagner too.

But it’s a joke that Bonds, Clemens, and ARod haven’t made it. If you want to keep all performance enhancing drug users out, fine. But no way David Ortiz and Mike Piazza should be in and not Bond, Clemens, and ARod.
 
Who Cares Michael Jones GIF by Achievement Hunter
 
First, congrats to two former Yankees, CC and Ichiro. Congrats to Billy Wagner too.

But it’s a joke that Bonds, Clemens, and ARod haven’t made it. If you want to keep all performance enhancing drug users out, fine. But no way David Ortiz and Mike Piazza should be in and not Bond, Clemens, and ARod.
No problem with any of them. Ichiro 100%. Relievers are underrepresented. Cc was the weakest of the three but some of his statistical peers, like Messina, are in.
 
Al Capone was never convicted of murder, O.J. was declared not guilty, Snoop Dog declared innocent by a jury of his peers, Lizzie Borden acquitted......
dude, did you really need to include Snoop Dogg in with an axe murderer, a mafia leader and a wife murdering football player?
 
That Ichiro wasn’t unanimous shows what a joke it is
Baseball writers are curmudgeons!
That Ichiro wasn’t unanimous shows what a joke it is...No, it shows that the holding out of a vote or two for sure thing inductees keeps up the tradition of not dissing those who came before him...The joke is that in the entire history of Major League baseball the only unanimous vote was for Mariano Rivera. Best player ever by far? uh no...... Mantle, Mays, Williams, Aaron, Griffey Jr., Musial and on and on and on were not unanimously voted in so why would Ichiro deserve that distinction over them?
 
Last edited:
They should change the rules so that any player who gets more than 99% of the vote should be able to punch the "if BLANK didn't get 100% then this person shouldn't either" holdouts in the face.
if 95% of voters are saying yes, and you are saying no. you are truly the problem and honestly should have to publcly acknowledge why you voted as is..


because at that point, it looks personal or just being a contrarian to troll people.
 
That Ichiro wasn’t unanimous shows what a joke it is...No, it shows that the holding out of a vote or two for sure thing inductees keeps up the tradition of not dissing those who came before him...The joke is that in the entire history of Major League baseball the only unanimous vote was for Mariano Rivera. Best player ever by far? uh no...... Mantle, Mays, Williams, Aaron, Griffey Jr., Musial and on and on and on were not unanimously voted in so why would Ichiro deserve that distinction over them?
That’s also idiotic
What is their justification for not voting in favor for any of Those players?
Only shows that it’s completely fixed
 
Relievers are underrepresented.


Relievers are overrepresented. The only difference between relief pitchers and starting pitchers is that relief pitchers are far, far less valuable.

They don't induct guys into the HOF for being really good pinch runners or really good late inning defensive replacements. Billy Wagner just got elected to the HOF and he's not one of the best 100 pitchers of all time. He's almost certainly not one of the 200 best pitchers of all time. The fact that he frequently pitched the last inning doesn't make him one.
 
if 95% of voters are saying yes, and you are saying no. you are truly the problem and honestly should have to publcly acknowledge why you voted as is..


because at that point, it looks personal or just being a contrarian to troll people.

The whole premise is flawed to begin with. You play a professional sport for a decade and a half and then a guy like Ron Cook decides if you get immortalized, when the most athletic thing he's done in the last 30 years was narrowly avoid shitting himself when traffic was backed up one day after he decided to indulge in the BOGO footlong deal at 7/11 that afternoon.

The inconsistencies just make the whole thing stupid, to me. You have guys who covered a player politicking to their peers in a room for said player's inclusion, etc. It shouldn't be like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ratking17
That’s also idiotic
What is their justification for not voting in favor for any of Those players?
Only shows that it’s completely fixed
No, that makes sense...you're idiotic, try to keep up...If the greatest of all time did not get 100% then no one should.
 
No, that makes sense...you're idiotic, try to keep up...If the greatest of all time did not get 100% then no one should.


So because 90 years ago some (actually several) old curmudgeon sports writer decided that he was never going to vote for anyone their first time on the ballot smarter people 90 years later should do the same thing?

There are certain players that should be a litmus test. If you didn't vote for Ichiro for the HOF then you are so dumb or so stuck in the past that you don't get to vote any more.

Not surprisingly, the HOF feels the same way, because over the last few years they have been weeding out many of the old time voters who voted that way. Which is why Ichiro could get within one vote, and Mariano Rivera could be unanimous, and Derek Jeter could miss by just one vote.
 
Well that's not actually how the baseball hall of fame works, so....

Well, I specifically remember a radio segment with Ron Cook talking about this exact thing when it was someone's last chance to get in. He said voters were pitching their cases to other voters while they were all sitting in a room someplace.

So I'm going to go ahead and believe the guy who actually has a vote that there is absolutely a scenario where this happens.
 
Well, I specifically remember a radio segment with Ron Cook talking about this exact thing when it was someone's last chance to get in. He said voters were pitching their cases to other voters while they were all sitting in a room someplace.

So I'm going to go ahead and believe the guy who actually has a vote that there is absolutely a scenario where this happens.


The baseball HOF is NOT like the football HOF where the voters all gather in a room and discuss the candidates. The baseball HOF still sends out paper ballots and a stamped return envelope for the voter to send their ballot back in. There is no big meeting where everyone gets together an hashes out who should get in and who should not, and there is no big in person meeting where people vote. There simply is not.

Now do writers who have a vote talk to other writers about who they are voting for and why they are voting for them? Well of course they do. Just like other baseball fans do. But there absolutely is not some sort of big meeting where they all get together and discuss the ballot and the candidates. There just isn't.
 
7. Time of Election: The duly authorized representatives of the BBWAA shall prepare, date and mail ballots to each elector during the latter part of November. The elector shall sign and return the completed ballot no later than December 31. The vote shall then be tabulated by the duly authorized representatives of the BBWAA.
 
No, that makes sense...you're idiotic, try to keep up...If the greatest of all time did not get 100% then no one should.
Why didn’t they ?
What is the justification to not vote in favor on the first ballot ?
Because baseball writers think they are gatekeepers?!?
 
Why didn’t they ?
What is the justification to not vote in favor on the first ballot ?
Because baseball writers think they are gatekeepers?!?
Some of those guys were troublemakers off the field. That is why they didn't get unanimous voting despite their dominance on the field.
 
The baseball HOF is NOT like the football HOF where the voters all gather in a room and discuss the candidates. The baseball HOF still sends out paper ballots and a stamped return envelope for the voter to send their ballot back in. There is no big meeting where everyone gets together an hashes out who should get in and who should not, and there is no big in person meeting where people vote. There simply is not.

Now do writers who have a vote talk to other writers about who they are voting for and why they are voting for them? Well of course they do. Just like other baseball fans do. But there absolutely is not some sort of big meeting where they all get together and discuss the ballot and the candidates. There just isn't.

Well, Ron Cook absolutely described the process of one voter trying to persuade the others in a room with him at the time, and he said everyone sort of took turns having the floor. He just did.

And even if it's not a formal part of the process, it is very likely that these writers try to influence each other. They just do.

And, depending on their relationships with one another, I suspect there are times when they are successful in doing so. They just are.

Jokes aside, maybe he was recollecting a story about the football hall of fame or something. But my comment wasn't exclusive to baseball anyway. Halls of fame in general are pretty flawed.
 
Well, Ron Cook absolutely described the process of one voter trying to persuade the others in a room with him at the time, and he said everyone sort of took turns having the floor. He just did.

And even if it's not a formal part of the process, it is very likely that these writers try to influence each other. They just do.

And, depending on their relationships with one another, I suspect there are times when they are successful in doing so. They just are.

Jokes aside, maybe he was recollecting a story about the football hall of fame or something. But my comment wasn't exclusive to baseball anyway. Halls of fame in general are pretty flawed.
Yeah but he was talking about the NFL HOF. I heard that, he was talking about how Ed Bouchette was making the case for LC Greenwood or someone like that.
 
Yeah but he was talking about the NFL HOF. I heard that, he was talking about how Ed Bouchette was making the case for LC Greenwood or someone like that.

I don't know if it was the same segment or not. In this one, I think there were multiple guys on the ballot where it was their last chance to get in. Could have been that one.
 
Well, Ron Cook absolutely described the process of one voter trying to persuade the others in a room with him at the time, and he said everyone sort of took turns having the floor. He just did.

And even if it's not a formal part of the process, it is very likely that these writers try to influence each other. They just do.

And, depending on their relationships with one another, I suspect there are times when they are successful in doing so. They just are.

Jokes aside, maybe he was recollecting a story about the football hall of fame or something. But my comment wasn't exclusive to baseball anyway. Halls of fame in general are pretty flawed.
I can only imagine the amount of pomposity gathered in that room.
 
Yeah but he was talking about the NFL HOF. I heard that, he was talking about how Ed Bouchette was making the case for LC Greenwood or someone like that.


That's the way that the NFL HOF works. All the voters get together in a room at the Super Bowl. One writer is given (or in most cases, volunteers for) the responsibility to present the case for each candidate on the ballot. That isn't the way that the baseball HOF works, not now, not ever.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT