Team Adam's Posted June 19, 2012 Author Share Posted June 19, 2012 I'm conflicted about it b/c at the rate we're going an entire generation of players will be left out of the HOF, but this morning on AM talk radio a caller pointed something out - [paraphrasing] The HOF is an honor and a privilege, not a right. To even be loosely connected to PED's, whether correctly or incorrectly accused, means a player was in a situation that disrespected the sanctity of the game. No player, regardless of how great they may have been should never be bigger than the game itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE Mook Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 ^RIGHT THERE nails it. You disrespect the game like that, you have no business even running a hot dog cart outside of Cooperstown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemer Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 That's a terrific sentiment and works for guys like Clemens and Bonds but what do you do with a guy like Jeff Bagwell? Suspicion is all there is. Is that fair? Ryan Braun? Pudge Rodriguez? Seams to me you're throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Again - all I can do is shake my head at what has been done to a huge swath of the game's history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Adam's Posted June 19, 2012 Author Share Posted June 19, 2012 Unfortunately theres going to be some "collateral damage" (for lack of a better word) because of the nature of the whole thing. BUT... I'm a firm believer of the 'where there is smoke theres fire' theory. Guys who get accused get accused for a reason, be it the clubhouse they were in at the time and players they associated with or just behavior that would lead to suspicion theres more often than not a reason for the accusation. Note that Jeter has never been accused for example, despite being around a lot of it. High character guys don't get wrongly accused... I believe there is a reason for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemer Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Not to change the subject.... How 'bout R.A.Dickey for Cy Young? Wow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE Mook Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Not to change the subject.... How 'bout R.A.Dickey for Cy Young? Wow! That wobbler is brilliant right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txredgt Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Here's the list of all the first timer's on the ballot for 2013, who do ya'll have getting in? Should be an interesting debate for sure: 2013: Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Craig Biggio, Curt Schilling, Sammy Sosa, Mike Piazza, Kenny Lofton, David Wells, Julio Franco, Shawn Green, Steve Finley, Roberto Hernandez, Jeff Cirillo, Jose Valentin, Reggie Sanders, Jeff Conine, Jose Mesa, Royce Clayton, Bob Wickman, Ryan Klesko, Aaron Sele, Woody Williams, Rondell White, Mike Lieberthal, Tony Batista, Mike Stanton, Sandy Alomar Jr., Damian Miller, Todd Walker I'll take Piazza and Biggio (that's the homer in me but the guy had a stellar career for 1 team). I'd love to say Clemens too but I think we all know he won't get in 1st ballot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE Mook Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Piazza and Biggio.... Definitely maybe. From that list, sorry, those are all I would even consider. I can't willingly put in those potential cheaters, and other marginal players, if I know they will be next to the likes of Joe Di., the Mick, Rickey Henderson, Cy Young, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemer Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 I'll concure with the Piazza and Biggio call. Piazza was the best hitting catcher EVER and Biggio was a great all-around player for a long time. Is Biggio "first ballot" material? Dunno. Iron Mike is, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cygnus Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 On that list for 2013, none of them. I can see Biggio, Schilling, and Piazza getting in, but not first ballot. And of those I'm still on the fence with Biggio and Schilling. I also wouldn't put Clemens as the greatest pitcher of the generation. I'd go with Pedro or Randy for that. Clemens generally had better teams than either of them and I really think PED was the cause for a bunch of his "greatness". Looking back it feels like he was great young, then started to fall off, got into PEDs, and then started dominating again. It just really feels like from '97 onward it was a bit artificial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemer Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Schilling had moments of greatness in his career but was no better than mediocre for a great deal of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyAcadia09 Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 BIGGIO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And Old Mr Red sock lol! Mr. Hamilton is PED free and still kills the ball. In another note, would be good to see Feldman get a win tonight 0-7 is RIDICULOUS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txredgt Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Clemens is #3 all time in the k's so the team thing is moot point to me and his 7 cy youngs speaks for itself. Stats alone he would be a sure bet hof but the ped stuff won't let him be first ballot. Schilling was more of a personality and a above average pitcher for a few good seasons. One thing I love about the baseball hof is that you have to be great for your career not just a few years which is why I say no to schilling or pedro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemer Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 The Yankee's winning streak ends at 10. Which means they weren't good enough to win 11 in a row. Slackers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE Mook Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 I don't know if Schill belongs in. We can whip out the "Did he win 300 games?" thing, but even at that, IIRC, Pedro didn't. Seeing all three of them pitch firsthand, during their primes, I have to say Pedro had the dirtiest stuff of the three. _____________________________________________________ The Rockies have gone to a 4 man pitching rotation...like that's gonna help them not be the suck every night of the week. Tulo sounds like he has a broken uter....I mean needs sports hernia surgery. CarGo should be back today if he wasn't last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Adam's Posted June 20, 2012 Author Share Posted June 20, 2012 I hate the 'first ballot hof' idea... either they're a hall of famer or they're not. Why should a guy have to be on the ballot a bunch of times before hes in the running? Seems really weird to me. If hes retired its not like he did anything in those post 1st ballot years to help his cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cygnus Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Clemens is #3 all time in the k's so the team thing is moot point to me and his 7 cy youngs speaks for itself. Stats alone he would be a sure bet hof but the ped stuff won't let him be first ballot. The team thing comes into play a little for wins and the CYs since they're tied to a little to the season's record. Ks are definitely individual. I'm not saying Clemens wasn't a great pitcher, just that we need to account for it a little when comparing to other players. A bit of the sad thing with Clemens is that he already had 3 CYs and HOF numbers before PEDs. Bonds was the same way. Both didn't need them to be a HOF player. They probably wouldn't have played as long or had a couple of the things they achieved, but would have still been marked down as one of the best to every play. I hate the 'first ballot hof' idea... either they're a hall of famer or they're not. Why should a guy have to be on the ballot a bunch of times before hes in the running? Seems really weird to me. If hes retired its not like he did anything in those post 1st ballot years to help his cause. I used to have the same opinion, but I've softened to it a bit. I look at it as a little bit of an extra honor for and to distinguish the truly great player over the "average" HOFer. A Nolen Ryan vs a Bruce Sutter. Now for years after the first I agree with you. For someone like Andre Dawson there was nothing he did in years 2-9 to change his hall worthiness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Adam's Posted June 20, 2012 Author Share Posted June 20, 2012 The process is just so arbitrary sometimes it drives me nuts... Tim Raines (IMO) was a "first ballot" kind of guy... 3k hits, stole more bases, scored more runs, and got on base more times than guys like Gwynn who got in on the first go around. He was easily a top 10 player, maybe even top 5, in the 80's. This article drove it home perfectly for me: Tim Raines still seeks Hall of Fame respect - SweetSpot Blog - ESPN Based on those stats why should Raines wait to get in when Gwynn got in first ballot? I firmly believe you're either in or your out... making some guys first ballot might be a way to honor some really special talent, but it also diminishes the talent/contributions of some excellent players as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE Mook Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Raines is probably one of the best leadoff hitters to ever step up to the plate. When it's all said and done, No one is close to Rickey, but Rock sure comes as close as anyone can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemer Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 I hate the 'first ballot hof' idea... either they're a hall of famer or they're not. Why should a guy have to be on the ballot a bunch of times before hes in the running? Seems really weird to me. If hes retired its not like he did anything in those post 1st ballot years to help his cause. I agree. But it doesn't change the fact that that's the way it is sometimes..... However - who ELSE is on the ballot at the same time can have a HUGE impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemer Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Raines is probably one of the best leadoff hitters to ever step up to the plate. When it's all said and done, No one is close to Rickey, but Rock sure comes as close as anyone can. Raines was great but he played in the shadow of Rickey. Also - the writers didn't like him as much as a guy like Tony Gwynn. Sadly - the writer's personal opinion of a guy has WAY too much impact on the voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE Mook Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Raines was great but he played in the shadow of Rickey. Also - the writers didn't like him as much as a guy like Tony Gwynn. Sadly - the writer's personal opinion of a guy has WAY too much impact on the voting. What's kinda sad now, is some of the people that have a vote, are younger than me. That means they didn't see people like Raines even play. There is going to be a generation of players that gets lost and never makes it. That's sad to me. If you have to think about if the guy should be in, then IMO, he shouldn't be. Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Adam's Posted June 20, 2012 Author Share Posted June 20, 2012 Raines is punished a little for playing in Canada... then finishing his career as a utility guy in NY.... had he played his whole career in NY or another large market he'd have probably been thought more highly of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDM Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL2G_NliGnI]cheaters - YouTube[/ame] So apparently there's a new rule in baseball where the Yankees don't have to actually catch the ball, or even have the ball in their glove for a catch to be called an out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Adam's Posted June 27, 2012 Author Share Posted June 27, 2012 Saw that last night! There are so many plays that show exactly why MLB needs to expand replay. I've said many times if people are so worried about it slowing the game down, then make it like football. Give each manager 2 or 3 opportunities to challenge a call (anything except balls/strikes) and thats it. The existing replay for fair/foul and home runs stays intact... allowing a manager to challenge a call for review a max of 3x a game probably adds less time than the current way where the manager comes out and gets in the umps face for 5 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts