|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jan 21, 2020 21:39:06 GMT -5
Derek Jeter and Larry Walker get in while Clemens and Bonds get snubbed.
Jeter missed unanimous selection by 1 vote. Kind of ironic considering he missed his one chance to win an MVP award because, in 2006, one writer completely left him off of his Top 10.
I've been fascinated by how much attention Colin Kaepernick has garnered with his ongoing boo-hoo story of being "black-balled" from the NFL. A mediocre NFL QB (amazing SB run notwithstanding) who couldn't land a job in the league because of the risk he took placing political statements on par priority-wise with his actual job. Not a bad player. Would he have been on a roster in 2017 without the kneeling stigma? Absolutely.
However, compare Kaeparnick to Bonds (another African-American athlete playing in the Bay Area). Barry Bonds is probably one of the 5 greatest players in the history of the sport and was still the most feared hitter in baseball in his final season in 2007. That season Bonds led the league in on-base percentage (.480) and walks in addition to hitting 28 HR in 340 AB -- while playing in the National League where he had to play the field. Bonds couldn't even get a job in the AL in 2008, where he could have and should have been a full-time DH. The guy was still stealing bases for crying out loud! And yet nobody cared -- and they still don't after years of being kept out of Cooperstown.
It's time to let the steroid guys in, not including those who violated MLB drug testing policy after it was implemented (Palmiero, Manny). Hopefully, the media love-fest for Big Papi will open that door in a couple of years. David Ortiz deserves to get in and hopefully Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGwire and A-ROD follow.
|
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Jan 21, 2020 21:45:17 GMT -5
False comparison.
Kaepernick did not cheat
Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire and Rodriguez cheated.
They should never be in the Hall
|
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jan 21, 2020 21:50:42 GMT -5
False comparison. Kaepernick did not cheat Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire and Rodriguez cheated. They should never be in the Hall Not trying to compare cheating to not cheating. Just comparing the public outcry to Kaepernick being black-balled versus the lack thereof when the same happened to Bonds. David Ortiz would be a direct comparison to Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGwire. All took steroids prior to MLB drug policy implementation, none were caught violating MLB drug policy at any point in their careers. |
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Jan 21, 2020 21:56:00 GMT -5
You do not deny that they cheated their peers, the past greats and the fans.
They gave themselves a drastically unfair advantage, whether or not MLB had a rule at that time or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jan 21, 2020 22:21:08 GMT -5
You do not deny that they cheated their peers, the past greats and the fans. They gave themselves a drastically unfair advantage, whether or not MLB had a rule at that time or not. The difficult thing is that, because MLB bungled the issue so badly, it will never be clear exactly WHO was cheating and who wasn't. I'm guessing your opposed to the fact that Pedro Martinez, who failed an MLB administered drug test in 2003, is in the Hall? Despite the fact that many of the hitters he baffled were taking drugs as well... |
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Jan 21, 2020 22:32:28 GMT -5
1-So do you believe that .Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire and Rodriguez took PEDs ?
2- That is a false equivalency
My parents taught me that two wrongs do not make a right
|
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Jan 21, 2020 22:39:57 GMT -5
I’m happy to see that Larry Walker finally got voted in
|
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jan 21, 2020 23:07:00 GMT -5
Boston Media is all over Curt Shilling missing out even though pre-ballot polls (who knew they had those?) Showed him narrowly getting in.
|
|
|
|
Post by HC16 on Jan 21, 2020 23:12:26 GMT -5
1-So do you believe that .Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire and Rodriguez took PEDs ? 2- That is a false equivalency My parents taught me that two wrongs do not make a right So Jerry Rice shouldn't be in the football HOF either then? He's admitted to using Stickum during his career even though it was explicitly banned 4 years before he entered the NFL. Don Drysdale and Whitey Ford shouldn't be in the hall either because they threw spitters. Heck, unlike steroids when Bonds and Clemens took them, spitters were actually outlawed. The whole steroid argument is silly. Did they take them, yes, but it wasn't illegal and they were clearly the best players of their era, which mostly predates my following of the sport. People love to condemn them for "cheating" and overlook the blatant rule breaking by eliete players from when they were growing up because Bonds and Clemens weren't "likeable". |
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Jan 21, 2020 23:23:50 GMT -5
They were not likable because their cheating gave them a distinct advantage over their peers.
The fact that they were great players before they took steroids makes their offenses all the more damning.
The comparisons to the spitballers is a false one since the advantages the steroid users received totally outweigh any perceived advantages the spitballers received.
and I have never heard that either Drysdale or Ford threw spitters. It is certainly not common knowledge the way that the steroid users is.
|
|
|
|
Post by HC16 on Jan 21, 2020 23:47:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Jan 22, 2020 0:32:31 GMT -5
The JAWS metric has Schilling ranked #26 among all starting pitchers. He stacks up well by most any measure--look at the post season success for example. It's ludicrous that he has not made it into the hall yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jan 22, 2020 8:14:34 GMT -5
I forgot that Alomar was in the Hall. The fact that he and Pedro slide through the cracks while others are barred shows a gross inconsistency among the writers. I believe there is a certain bias against steroids when it applies to power hitters as opposed to other players. Why Pedro and not Clemens then you say? IMO, it's because Clemens IIRC was linked to HGH and continued steroid rumors through the end of his career in 2007 (despite never failing a drug test) while Pedro faced no such accusations after his failed 2003 test, which was supposed to be anonymous. Or it could just be like-ability, which leads me to Big Papi. It's no secret that David Ortiz is a media darling (deservedly so). My prediction is that the writers welcome him into the Hall with open arms in spite of their bias against steroid-using power hitters. This could and should pave the way for Sosa/McGwire/Bonds. |
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jan 22, 2020 8:20:20 GMT -5
They were not likable because their cheating gave them a distinct advantage over their peers. The fact that they were great players before they took steroids makes their offenses all the more damning. The comparisons to the spitballers is a false one since the advantages the steroid users received totally outweigh any perceived advantages the spitballers received. and I have never heard that either Drysdale or Ford threw spitters. It is certainly not common knowledge the way that the steroid users is. hchoops - you are no doubt a principled man. And a consistent one at that. While I disagree with you to an extent, I have very much enjoyed your argument. My general opinion is that the HOF writers need to be more consistent. Seems like "steroids" are used as a crutch when it comes to not voting for certain guys for the HOF, when like-ability is really the issue. I also think baseball gets more scrutiny when it comes to steroids than other sports because of the sanctity of the statistics, especially when it comes to home run totals. No one cares about stats in football which is why I think the fan doesn't feel compromised and cheated to the same extent when it is revealed that NFL players took performance-enhancing drugs. A lot more people discuss the growing size of Barry Bonds head over his 20 year career than discuss the head size of Peyton Manning. On a side note, it has been recently hypothesized that 30-50% of NFL players use some form of HGH. And nobody cares! Double standard between the sports. |
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Jan 22, 2020 8:29:46 GMT -5
The JAWS metric has Schilling ranked #26 among all starting pitchers. He stacks up well by most any measure--look at the post season success for example. It's ludicrous that he has not made it into the hall yet. As a Red Sox fan, this pales in comparison to another injustice. Consider Pitchers A and B below. They were contemporaries. One is in the Hall of Fame, the other isn't, despite striking similarities. Guess which one is in, and who they are (Hint: They both played for the Yankees at some point . . .)
Pitcher A (Pitcher B)
229-172, .571 (224-166, .574)
484 GS (476 GS)
187 CG, 49 Shutouts (181 CG, 42 Shutouts)
3,486 IP (3,449 IP)
2,416 K (2,016 K)
3.30 ERA (3.26 ERA)
114 ERA+ (104 ERA+)
3.47 FIP (3.66 FIP)
1.199 WHIP (1.134 WHIP)
66.0 WAR (40.9 WAR)
55.1 JAWS (37.9 JAWS)
|
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jan 22, 2020 8:33:47 GMT -5
I'm kind of curious about the one writer who left Jeter off of his ballot (396 of 397) and would like to hear his/her explanation but something tells me it is not forthcoming.
(Of course there are many other greats who have not been unanimous - but this puts Jeter as the top vote-getter of all time among position players so I'm sure an explanation from this single outlier would be very interesting.)
(The chatter on NY sports radio was that Schilling's political views and some of the things he has said makes it easy for some writers not to select him given the cancel-culture climate nowadays...notwithstanding his baseball accomplishments.)
|
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Jan 22, 2020 8:37:25 GMT -5
I'm kind of curious about the one writer who left Jeter off of his ballot (396 of 397) and would like to hear his/her explanation but something tells me it is not forthcoming. Of course there are many other greats who have not been unanimous . . .Mariano Rivera is the only player in the Hall who was unanimously elected.
|
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jan 22, 2020 8:49:36 GMT -5
I'm kind of curious about the one writer who left Jeter off of his ballot (396 of 397) and would like to hear his/her explanation but something tells me it is not forthcoming. Of course there are many other greats who have not been unanimous . . .Mariano Rivera is the only player in the Hall who was unanimously elected.
Yes, that's why I pointed out Jeter at 396/397 is the top vote-getting position player of all time. There used to be sportswriters who said they never vote for a player the first year eligible (to explain why they didn't for various all-time greats...Ken Griffey Jr. missed 3 votes enroute to 99%) and there were various sportswriters accused of racism (Willie Mays got just 95%) and there are those who will cast votes based on PEDs. By unanimously voting in Mariano, the sportswriters proved they are now actually capable of unanimously putting in a player. And one, just one, did not vote for Jeter. |
|
|
|
Post by alum on Jan 22, 2020 8:53:03 GMT -5
The JAWS metric has Schilling ranked #26 among all starting pitchers. He stacks up well by most any measure--look at the post season success for example. It's ludicrous that he has not made it into the hall yet. The challenge is that different voters are using different criteria and, because some are intellectually dishonest, using different criteria for different players. If a voter isn't motivated to want Schilling in the HOF, he or she can point to his relatively low win total to justify a vote against him. Of course, I would want to ask that voter if Sandy Koufax (165 wins) belongs in the Hall. If a voter wants to rely on advanced metrics like career WAR to support a different player, I want to know why Bobby Grich isn't in the Hall. His career WAR is 71 and he did it in 17 seasons. That's almost as many in a career as Jeter (72) and given that Grich played three fewer seasons, one might think he should be in the Hall, too. See www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/news/bobby-grich-hall-of-fame-chances-not-optimistic-orioles-angels/b0pvdt5rxr8f1ntug93s7ixmmSchilling belongs in the Hall no matter how annoying I find him. The best thing about the Hall of Fame is that it gives fans something to do in January.  |
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jan 22, 2020 8:57:13 GMT -5
I'm kind of curious about the one writer who left Jeter off of his ballot (396 of 397) and would like to hear his/her explanation but something tells me it is not forthcoming.(Of course there are many other greats who have not been unanimous - but this puts Jeter as the top vote-getter of all time among position players so I'm sure an explanation from this single outlier would be very interesting.) (The chatter on NY sports radio was that Schilling's political views and some of the things he has said makes it easy for some writers not to select him given the cancel-culture climate nowadays...notwithstanding his baseball accomplishments.) There have always been voters who for some reason with-hold HOF votes for particular players during their first year of eligibility. The argument is that certain guys are clearly Hall of Famers but don't deserve to be "first ballot" and hence voters decide to leave them off the ballot their first year of eligibility for this reason. So chances are either a) this one particular writer didn't think Jeter deserved first ballot status or b) the writer just doesn't like Jeter. Or it could be c) that the writer just wanted to ensure Jeter didn't get the unanimous entry that had been rumored. I still find it fascinating that Mo Rivera is the only guy in history to get in unanimous. You would think that on principle, at least one writer would have left him off the ballot simply because he played his entire career as a relief pitcher. |
|
|
|
Post by CHC8485 on Jan 22, 2020 8:59:45 GMT -5
There is a morals clause, if you will, in the Baseball Hall of Fame selection. Think the difference between Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, & McGuire has far more to do with the defiant attitude they displayed then and since. McGuire is the least of these as he has at least since acted a bit more penitent.
Also think that breaking sacred records is playing into it in a big way and the writers, particularly older ones, who may be thinking along the lines of ... Baseball is not going to change the record book, so you have the records as recognition for your career, so I refuse to give you the honor of the Hall of Fame with that level of cheating you engaged in, especially since you show no remorse.
But looking at the history of baseball - including very recent history - bending the rules and cheating to get an advantage is part of the culture of the sport. As such, I'm fairly certain everyone in the Hall found some way to cheat whether against the rules - using video to steal signs - or against the law - using steroids. I'm of the opinion that you let them in and include the known or suspected cheating in their official biography/plaque so it is not hidden particularly in a Bonds or Clemens case where they likely are in the Hall before the steroid use became rampant.
|
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Jan 22, 2020 9:06:48 GMT -5
The JAWS metric has Schilling ranked #26 among all starting pitchers. He stacks up well by most any measure--look at the post season success for example. It's ludicrous that he has not made it into the hall yet. As a Red Sox fan, this pales in comparison to another injustice. Consider Pitchers A and B below. They were contemporaries. One is in the Hall of Fame, the other isn't, despite striking similarities. Guess which one is in, and who they are (Hint: They both played for the Yankees at some point . . .)
Pitcher A (Pitcher B)
229-172, .571 (224-166, .574)
484 GS (476 GS)
187 CG, 49 Shutouts (181 CG, 42 Shutouts)
3,486 IP (3,449 IP)
2,416 K (2,016 K)
3.30 ERA (3.26 ERA)
114 ERA+ (104 ERA+)
3.47 FIP (3.66 FIP)
1.199 WHIP (1.134 WHIP)
66.0 WAR (40.9 WAR)
55.1 JAWS (37.9 JAWS)
I've thought a lot over the years about Luis Tiant's qualifications for the Hall. JAWS has him as #57 starter while Catfish Hunter is at #169 and yet made the HOF, Pop Haines is in the Hall at #303. Of course, one should avoid the argument that because a candidate is better than someone already in the Hall then the candidate should be enshrined. |
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Jan 22, 2020 9:07:20 GMT -5
The JAWS metric has Schilling ranked #26 among all starting pitchers. He stacks up well by most any measure--look at the post season success for example. It's ludicrous that he has not made it into the hall yet. As a Red Sox fan, this pales in comparison to another injustice. Consider Pitchers A and B below. They were contemporaries. One is in the Hall of Fame, the other isn't, despite striking similarities. Guess which one is in, and who they are (Hint: They both played for the Yankees at some point . . .)
Pitcher A (Pitcher B)
229-172, .571 (224-166, .574)
484 GS (476 GS)
187 CG, 49 Shutouts (181 CG, 42 Shutouts)
3,486 IP (3,449 IP)
2,416 K (2,016 K)
3.30 ERA (3.26 ERA)
114 ERA+ (104 ERA+)
3.47 FIP (3.66 FIP)
1.199 WHIP (1.134 WHIP)
66.0 WAR (40.9 WAR)
55.1 JAWS (37.9 JAWS)
Catfish Hunter - In Luis Tiant - NOT?
|
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Jan 22, 2020 9:16:57 GMT -5
Correct. Tiant is Pitcher A, Hunter is Pitcher B.
I understand the criticism of the argument that "Pitcher B is in, so Pitcher A should be, too." But Tiant's resume is better than a lot of guys who are in.
There are 79 pitchers in the HOF. Tiant's career WAR is higher than 26 of them; his WAR 7 is higher than 23 of them; his JAWS is higher than 24 of them.
He belongs.
|
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Jan 22, 2020 9:23:44 GMT -5
The other players had plenty of opportunity to use steroids and many did. 103 players tested positive when the MLB started testing in 2003, including at least 2 already in the hall in Pedro and Roberto Alomar. If they're in, there's no reason to keep out Clemens or Bonds. Bonds was much better than Alomar and, as much as I hate to say it, Clemens had a better career than Pedro again I say, 2, 3, 100 wrongs do not make a right. Because some/many past players are in the Hall wrongly, does not require that players who blatantly cheated the game should be in. Some voters are subjectively vindictive because of personal slights, but I believe that some/many vote on principle, that being that cheaters do not belong. |
|
