Baseball Hall of Fame = Joke (1 Viewer)

[tdubel]

I don't take anything away from Barry Larkin, well deserved.............but.................

Cmon, I think it is nuts you have biased opinioned sportswriters voting here. Wow. Always thought this was looney.

I guess they have gotten it right most of the time, but I have a problem on a few in particular:

1. Ron Santo = 9 time all star 3rd Baseman he is finally on Veterans ballot, I hope he gets it.

2. Dave Parker?????????WHY and WHEN? Guy was one of the most dominant players of his era, played from 1973 til 1991, won a number of world series with different teams, batting championships, home runs, triples records and had one of the greatest cannons for an arm. Anyone remember the 1979 all star game where he threw out the guy from the warning track on a dead throw?

I find the thing a joke at some of the other names not there.

IMO

TD

 

[lancer]

Excellent points about Santo and Parker. They should both have been in long ago. -- Al

 

[Warrior]

Anyone remember the 1979 all star game where he threw out the guy from the warning track on a dead throw?

That was an absolute pea, a heat seeking missile.

He was a great player for sure.

 

[jazzeum]

Santo is in. Was voted in about a month ago. Too bad he didn't live to see it.

Wouldn't have voted for Larkin or Parker. Good players but not HOF. Don't think Parker is in because of drugs. In baseball, unlike football, character matters. Not saying it's right or wrong, it just matters.

 

[tdubel]

Santo is in. Was voted in about a month ago. Too bad he didn't live to see it.

Wouldn't have voted for Larkin or Parker. Good players but not HOF. Don't think Parker is in because of drugs. In baseball, unlike football, character matters. Not saying it's right or wrong, it just matters.

Brad,
thanks for the update on Santo, I couldnt remember when the Vets voted, must have been December.

Parker's numbers are comparable to a lot who are in and he was dominating when he played. At one point opposing teams refused to pitch to him. I also like him because he was dominating in beginning of his career, middle of career and even the end when he won another world title with the A's as a formidable DH. The drugs, horse puckey, if you read that whole story, he was the biggest name, so got the biggest headline due to his testimony in court. Recreational use, I agree, not good, but he never missed a game, plane, practice, etc. On top of that, Ricky Henderson is in and there was long rumor of drug use throughout his career, yet he is in. Also, when talking about character, remember Ty Cobb as well as the entire Gashouse Gang is in and I don't think they rated very high on morals and character!
Bottom line, most fans will say he deserves it and he is not the only one. Again, I say the process is flawed in BB HOF and it borders on becoming a joke.

TD

 

[lancer]

Santo is in. Was voted in about a month ago. Too bad he didn't live to see it.

Wouldn't have voted for Larkin or Parker. Good players but not HOF. Don't think Parker is in because of drugs. In baseball, unlike football, character matters. Not saying it's right or wrong, it just matters.

Crikey, I must be getting old. I knew Santos was voted in, but it went completely out of my head.:redface2: It is a big pity that he didn't live to receive the honor. -- Al

 

[jazzeum]

I think too many players get in who are good players but not the greats of the game. Looking at Parker's stats he had some good years but also some clunkers. BA is ok, 290, but HRs are nothing special, 339. It's not like he got close or anything. He peaked at around 25% of votes required, far from the necessary 75%. Again, a good and a feared player but not a great player. I wouldn't have chosen Dawson and Jim Rice. To me, it's a gut test. You just know whether so and so is a great player. Ricky changed the game. Gwynn was special. Cal was special. Dawson, Paker and Rice not as good.

Unfortunately, whether you like it or not, character does count at least in the last twenty years in HOF voting.

Parker is no longer eligible so will have to get in through the Veterans wing and those guys are notoriously slow and there is a lot of politics there. Based on some of the guys getting in through there, I thing Gil Hodges should be there but I don't think it will ever happen.

 

[Peter Reuss]

How can Jack Morris not get in?? He was THE Big Game pitcher of his era...and the winningest pitcher of his decade.

Yes his ERA is a touch high...but you have to remember the juiced era he pitched in!

 

[jazzeum]

With all due respect, he's marginal. Again, when you think of the great pitchers of his era, do you think of Morris? I don't. When you think of Greg Maddux, do you think of HOF? You don't even have to think about it. When you have to give a candidate a second thought, then he's probably not HOF material.

 

[Louis Badolato]

I think too many players get in who are good players but not the greats of the game. Looking at Parker's stats he had some good years but also some clunkers. BA is ok, 290, but HRs are nothing special, 339. It's not like he got close or anything. He peaked at around 25% of votes required, far from the necessary 75%. Again, a good and a feared player but not a great player. I wouldn't have chosen Dawson and Jim Rice. To me, it's a gut test. You just know whether so and so is a great player. Ricky changed the game. Gwynn was special. Cal was special. Dawson, Paker and Rice not as good.

Unfortunately, whether you like it or not, character does count at least in the last twenty years in HOF voting.

Parker is no longer eligible so will have to get in through the Veterans wing and those guys are notoriously slow and there is a lot of politics there. Based on some of the guys getting in through there, I thing Gil Hodges should be there but I don't think it will ever happen.

I agree with everything you have said, with the exception of Jim Rice. As a Yankee fan, I feared Jim Rice as a great player, a game changer. If your sworn enemy fears and respects you, you belong in the Hall.

Frankly, I think the hall of fame is becoming a joke, because it is more about longevity than quality of accomplishments. I think a player who had 10 great seasons (like a Jim Rice or a Don Mattingly) is more deserving than a player who had 15+ good seasons so stacked up one of the magic numbers that get you in. And those magic numbers shouldn't be magic, because there has to be sufficient quality to go with the quantity. Compare for example, Jeter with Damon. Jeter is a career .314 hitter, won the Rookie of the Year in 1996, was one of the dominant players in MLB from 1998 until around 2004, with three years where he finished 2nd or 3rd in MVP voting, is a 12 time all star, finished in the top ten in MVP voting 4 other times, has been a major part of 5 championships, has the most hits in post season history and a career post season batting average of .307 in 152 games (nearly a full season!), won 4 gold gloves, and still hit .336 three seasons ago at age 34 and .297 last season when he got hit number 3,000 at age 36. Damon is a really good player, has had some magical moments in the playoffs both with the Red Sox and the Yankees in winning 2 titles, but is a career .286 hitter, who was only an all star twice, and never finished higher than 13th in the MVP voting. However, he has 2,723 hits, and it he plays two more seasons, he will also reach the magic number of 3,000. Jeter is clearly a first ballot hall of famer, but to me Damon just shouldn't make the cut. However, he will get hit number 3,000 and be a shoe in.

 

[lancer]

First off, I am a big Jack Morris fan, however, I think he is hit or miss HOF material. His career stats put him on the same level as Dennis Martinez and Jamie Moyer, both good pitchers but not HOF caliber. Just on career stats, Morris is middle of the road. He never led the league in ERA, never won a Cy Young (not an HOF requirement, thank goodness) or ever had an ERA under 3.00. In fact, if Morris went to the HOF, his career ERA of 3.90 would be the highest in the HOF. During his best years, 1979-1992, he won 20 games 3 times. In that time span, there were 54 other 20 games seasons posted by other pitchers. Morris ranks 38,44, and 57 on that list. In the "new" stats that the stat people love, the WAR or wins above replacement, Morris trails Martinez and is just ahead of Moyer. Again, pretty average. Having said all that, Morris was a horse, threw a lot of innings and was a real hard-nosed competitor. The 1-0, ten inning win for Minnesota in the World Series, I still count as the best game I've SEEN pitched. I just don't know if he is HOF, stat wise. -- Al

 

[jac28]

Ok - so, yes I'm a Reds fan and a Barry Larkin fan.. So I'll just list some of his accomplishments (looks like a HOFer to me):

All-Star - 12 times
Silver Slugger Award - 9 times
Gold Glove Award - 3 times
MVP - 1 time
World Series Championship - 1 time

First 30-30 Shortstop in baseball

Listed in many publications and websites in top 10 and top 15 Shortstops of ALL-TIME...
Same or higher batting average than 15 of the 21 current shortstops in the HOF
Higher HR total than 17 of the 21 current shortstops in the HOF

And yes, it still is a joke sometimes.. Not a Cubs fan, but Santo should have been in a long time ago...

Regards,

Jim

 

[tdubel]

Ok - so, yes I'm a Reds fan and a Barry Larkin fan.. So I'll just list some of his accomplishments (looks like a HOFer to me):

All-Star - 12 times
Silver Slugger Award - 9 times
Gold Glove Award - 3 times
MVP - 1 time
World Series Championship - 1 time

First 30-30 Shortstop in baseball

Listed in many publications and websites in top 10 and top 15 Shortstops of ALL-TIME...
Same or higher batting average than 15 of the 21 current shortstops in the HOF
Higher HR total than 17 of the 21 current shortstops in the HOF

And yes, it still is a joke sometimes.. Not a Cubs fan, but Santo should have been in a long time ago...

Regards,

Jim

Jim,
If my post seem to degrade Barry, not my intention, I think he should be in. I was more or less arguing Parker which based on everything I know, he should be there. I just don't put stock in an institution that is voted on by sportswriters.


Brad,
We will agree to disagree, but Parker's character was not terrible, he made a mistake and righted the wrong. Ricky Henderson on the other hand, while a great player was always on the edge, yet he got in. Parker's numbers in a lot of respects were good enough for the hall. I bet his peers would vote him in and to me, that is what matters, not a bunch of sportswriting hacks with a pencil and an opinion. Agree with Louis, Jim Rice was a tremendous baseball player.

Speaking of Character, my opinion on Barry Bonds. He made a tragic mistake as he didn't need home runs to get in the Hall. He could have done it on his pure hitting ability for the majority of his career. Yet, he let his own ego get the better of him and due to his twilight of his career, he will always be the villain. You could even make the argument that baseball condoned it and wanted the home run race to happen, it seemed to breath life back into a dying sport.

TD