One of the Biggest Hall of Fame Classes to date: Discussion and vote thread

[Jeffy25]

I have nothing against Bagwell. It was always fun to compare Big Frank with him since, as you may know, they were born on the same day.

Maybe they go in together as well

They also share my mothers birthday :/


Not the same year of course

[Jeffy25]

I haven't really been following, but something I was wondering. just watching PTI and when asked, Kornheiser said he would vote for Bonds/Clemans/Sosa, but not in the first year. I don't understand this. what is going to change from this year to next year? nothing. they're done playing, their stats are what they are.
maybe not voting them in for the first year of eligibility is a way of punishing them? just seems childish to me. numbers alone are HOF worthy. now if you feel they cheated and want to punish them, don't vote for them at all.

I love when people make those horrible arguments.


first ballot, first ballot!


It means nothing. It's so stupid to 'punish' a player like that.

Either he is a hall of famer, or he isn't.


Babe Ruth is as much a hall of famer as Bert Blyleven.

[Jeffy25]

For the 26 that voted for Jack Morris


Does this guy belong in as well according to you?

[bagwell368]

Bagwell, Schilling, Raines would be on my ballot.
I don't think Trammell is worthy, because I don't trust fielding metrics calculated for games that were played in the 80s. By the eye test he isn't a hall of famer.
And as I already said, I would rather vote for Todd van Poppel before I'd consider Bonds et al.

edit: forgot Piazza but whatever...

Fielding metrics back to 1948 are quite good, and after 1972 - 100% complete. See BR, it's a more accurate means of calculating defense than UZR because its far less erratic. Even FG uses ZR before 2002, and IMO they should still use it as UZR skews the WAR of positional players too much to be trusted.

Trammell is inside the top 8 SS's of all time, and since Santo got in, probably the single biggest oversight of any positional player still living and eligible.

[Jeffy25]

Fielding metrics back to 1948 are quite good, and after 1972 - 100% complete. See BR, it's a more accurate means of calculating defense than UZR because its far less erratic. Even FG uses ZR before 2002, and IMO they should still use it as UZR skews the WAR of positional players too much to be trusted.

Trammell is inside the top 8 SS's of all time, and since Santo got in, probably the single biggest oversight of any positional player still living and eligible.

Whitaker should be in too

[cubbiefan_est88]

Bagwell was steroid era who is to say he didnt juice?

Evidence.

I was just making a statement. You dont know who did in that era please show me evidence he didnt? Because besides what you think numbers are not evidence of steroid use. If it were true every bodybuilder on the plant would play baseball.

[bagwell368]

Whitaker should be in too

You know if I had a buck for every time I made the case for Trammell and you came in with Whitaker, I'd have about 6 bucks. You're right.

These two guys should replace Tinkers and Evers in that famous phrase.

[Greedy22]

^^ it is not a court of law, but it is a history museum. Picking and choosing what stories you want to tell and burying other stories that clearly have historical significance is not how history should work.

Great post.

[Halladay]

Clemens is on the ballot...and he's still pitching...

[OldStyleCubbies]

I honestly think Bonds should get in idc that he used steroids. He was unreal.

[bagwell368]

I honestly think Bonds should get in idc that he used steroids. He was unreal.

Actually the step around on Bonds is that he amassed a HOF career before he obviously juiced. I used to have a collection of pics that showed him over the years. His historically bizarre age 35+ performance is another indicator that he was dirty. The recent pictures of him with a normal sized head is another.

He should go in, but I'll hold my nose when it happens.

Guys like Raffy, Sosa, Mac clearly were NOT HOF players before the juice. They are out.

[Mr Haha]

Piazza
Bagwell
Biggio

[Mr Haha]

This forum doesn't like the steroids argument because admitting that steroids matter renders statistics as something less than absolute, which SHOULD NEVER BE.

[Jeffy25]

This forum doesn't like the steroids argument because admitting that steroids matter renders statistics as something less than absolute, which SHOULD NEVER BE.

No.

It's because we can't, and shouldn't be judge, jury, and executioner of something that wasn't banned from the game and was a product of the game when it happened.


These guys were not banned, or put into trouble. Clean players were not calling them out. Everybody looked the other way.

Now, a decade later, it's wrong, and we should punish them for suspected steroid use (on some known) and kick them out of our baseball museum.


It has nothing to do with stats when you are talking about PEDs. It has everything to do with how the game handled it and how we are choosing to punish players for being a product of their times.


We don't know how much it impacts their game
We don't know how when they were taking what
We don't know who took what, when, and how much

So why on earth are we going to cast this judgment?

That, and we already have users in the hall of fame.


This museum should reflect what happened in baseball history. PED's happened. I'm not saying celebrate it. But we shouldn't punish individuals for something that happened all around them, and we don't know those three above answers.

[thefeckcampaign]

No.

It's because we can't, and shouldn't be judge, jury, and executioner of something that wasn't banned from the game and was a product of the game when it happened.


These guys were not banned, or put into trouble. Clean players were not calling them out. Everybody looked the other way.

Now, a decade later, it's wrong, and we should punish them for suspected steroid use (on some known) and kick them out of our baseball museum.


It has nothing to do with stats when you are talking about PEDs. It has everything to do with how the game handled it and how we are choosing to punish players for being a product of their times.


We don't know how much it impacts their game
We don't know how when they were taking what
We don't know who took what, when, and how much

So why on earth are we going to cast this judgment?

That, and we already have users in the hall of fame.


This museum should reflect what happened in baseball history. PED's happened. I'm not saying celebrate it. But we shouldn't punish individuals for something that happened all around them, and we don't know those three above answers.

Because an absurd amount of players hit more HR's than we've seen in decades. Because of that, history has been blurred or even ruined. Because though in baseball did not post a rule about it, it was against the law.