Outside Topic MLB Hall of Fame

Outside Topic MLB Hall of Fame - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Outside Topic MLB Hall of Fame (/thread-23842.html)

Pages: 1 2

MLB Hall of Fame - Phogge - 12-05-2022

Sixteen voters, sixteen for McGriff.

Four or less for Bonds and Clemens.

YES!

RE: Hall of Fame - BostonCard - 12-05-2022

Is the moral of the story "don't be an a-hole" or "don't [get caught] using PEDs". Or maybe, "if you get caught using PEDs, don't have been an a-hole"

Bonds and Clemens in the hall of fame would be an insult to all the guys who slogged away for years without using. They probably would have been great enough to merit entry without using PEDs, but they used them, and were caught.

BC

RE: Hall of Fame - Phogge - 12-05-2022

Both. Been around on the field when both were guilty of being an asshole. Add PEDS and you have two strikes. Maybe 2.99 strikes.

RE: Hall of Fame - Mick - 12-05-2022

Roger Clemens, class act:
2000WS Gm2: Clemens throws bat in direction of Piazza - YouTube

I knew one of Bonds' teammates from Serra's HS team. And frankly, this guy himself was one of the bigger jerks I'd ever run across. He said as big a jerk as Bonds was in public, he was a bigger jerk in private.

RE: Hall of Fame - Phogge - 12-05-2022

Quote from Indian School Park during drills before moving to Scottsdale Stadium from a Bonds teammate in Bonds' first Giants year after an incident with a cameraman (me).

Teammate: "He's a prick but he can hit."

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - Leftcoast - 12-05-2022

I'm a BIG Giants fan and I'm fine with him being left out. I'd prefer he got in with a bio that includes his PED use and other team related issues but we know that won't happen.

The lesson here is treat people right and respect the game. I'm fine with Rose, Clemons and Bonds being the real-life examples punctuating that lesson. For me (at least) it's now time to note the decision and move on.

triangle2 - triangle2 - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 12:36 PM)Mick Wrote: Roger Clemens, class act:
2000WS Gm2: Clemens throws bat in direction of Piazza - YouTube

I knew one of Bonds' teammates from Serra's HS team. And frankly, this guy himself was one of the bigger jerks I'd ever run across. He said as big a jerk as Bonds was in public, he was a bigger jerk in private.

There were a lot of pricks on the Serra sports teams from that era. Speaking from personal experience…

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - gailtate - 12-05-2022

I'll just be glad to not have Bonds to kick around anymore. I watched the excellent HBO piece on Willie Mays recently. Only negative was its conspicuously promotional love-letter (from the makers) to Willy's err-o-gant Godson. Came across as a blatant suck-up to HoF voters. Glad they ignored him Yet again. In the documentary, Bonds comes across incredibly self-effacing, saccharine sweet and sentimental. About as far as can be from authentic.

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - lex24 - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 06:20 PM)gailtate Wrote: I'll just be glad to not have Bonds to kick around anymore. I watched the excellent HBO piece on Willie Mays recently. Only negative was its conspicuously promotional love-letter (from the makers) to Willy's err-o-gant Godson. Came across as a blatant suck-up to HoF voters. Glad they ignored him Yet again. In the documentary, Bonds comes across incredibly self-effacing, saccharine sweet and sentimental. About as far as can be from authentic.

Heard Bob Costas today talking about Bonds segment on the Documentary. Said it was one of the best segments. I haven’t seen it yet, so can’t comment on specifics. But Bonds affection for Mays is real. And he has no reason to “suck up” to HOF voters. He’s had his 10 years with the writers. Now it’s the Committee’s turn. Mostly new-players.

Bonds is a jerk. No doubt. He also should be in the Hall. It’s full of cheaters. And he was a Hall of Famer before PEDs. Shouldn’t matter that he was a jerk. Same for Clemons. It’s not a social club. It’s a museum. And it’s full of jerks.

Bud Selig, who is in the HOF presided over the steroid era. And he knew damn well what was going on well before any crackdown. But chicks and ESPN love the long ball. And McGwire, Sosa brought fans back after the strike. Hypocrisy at its finest.

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - gocard14 - 12-05-2022

A hall of fame without the best baseball player of my lifetime is not a hall of fame worth having.

Not sure how him (allegedly) being a jagoff is relevant in any way to hall of fame credentials. Put the steroid stuff (for which he tested positive as often as anyone else in the era) on the plaque.

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - gailtate - 12-06-2022

(12-05-2022, 10:35 PM)lex24 Wrote:
(12-05-2022, 06:20 PM)gailtate Wrote: I'll just be glad to not have Bonds to kick around anymore. I watched the excellent HBO piece on Willie Mays recently. Only negative was its conspicuously promotional love-letter (from the makers) to Willy's err-o-gant Godson. Came across as a blatant suck-up to HoF voters. Glad they ignored him Yet again. In the documentary, Bonds comes across incredibly self-effacing, saccharine sweet and sentimental. About as far as can be from authentic.

Heard Bob Costas today talking about Bonds segment on the Documentary. Said it was one of the best segments. I haven’t seen it yet, so can’t comment on specifics. But Bonds affection for Mays is real. And he has no reason to “suck up” to HOF voters. He’s had his 10 years with the writers. Now it’s the Committee’s turn. Mostly new-players.

Bonds is a jerk. No doubt. He also should be in the Hall. It’s full of cheaters. And he was a Hall of Famer before PEDs. Shouldn’t matter that he was a jerk. Same for Clemons. It’s not a social club. It’s a museum. And it’s full of jerks.

Bud Selig, who is in the HOF presided over the steroid era. And he knew damn well what was going on well before any crackdown. But chicks and ESPN love the long ball. And McGwire, Sosa brought fans back after the strike. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Reasonable, informed, gracious, thoughtful and intelligent people can disagree. :)

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - BostonCard - 12-06-2022

(12-06-2022, 09:11 AM)gailtate Wrote: Reasonable, informed, gracious, thoughtful and intelligent people can disagree. :)

Crazy, isn't it?

I'm with you on Bonds and the Hall, but I hear the people who are arguing he belongs in the HoF (with an honest accounting of allegations against him). I agree with Lex that Selig being in the HoF is an insult to anyone who loved the game. Almost by definition, the HoF will have people disagreeing, since no two people will have the same definition of what defines greatness.

BC

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - Phogge - 12-06-2022

Well you had to be around Bonds to appreciate how miserable a human being he was. PEDS is only part of the story. There is an active resentment from many who have a vote. You don’t have to be a model citizen to make the Hall but you shouldn’t go out of your way to make people dislike you. Ditto Kent.

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - OutsiderFan - 12-06-2022

Like humans shouldn't be calling balls and strikes anymore, baseball writers shouldn't be voting on who is in the Hall of Fame anymore.

The numbers are what matters. The personalities don't.

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - TonyLima - 12-06-2022

(12-05-2022, 10:42 PM)gocard14 Wrote: A hall of fame without the best baseball player of my lifetime is not a hall of fame worth having.

Not sure how him (allegedly) being a jagoff is relevant in any way to hall of fame credentials. Put the steroid stuff (for which he tested positive as often as anyone else in the era) on the plaque.

Agree. Leaving him out does more damage to the HOF than to Mr. Bonds.

(12-05-2022, 12:03 PM)Phogge Wrote: Both. Been around on the field when both were guilty of being an asshole. Add PEDS and you have two strikes. Maybe 2.99 strikes.

Now do Ty Cobb.

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - lex24 - 12-06-2022

(12-06-2022, 12:13 PM)TonyLima Wrote:
(12-05-2022, 10:42 PM)gocard14 Wrote: A hall of fame without the best baseball player of my lifetime is not a hall of fame worth having.

Not sure how him (allegedly) being a jagoff is relevant in any way to hall of fame credentials. Put the steroid stuff (for which he tested positive as often as anyone else in the era) on the plaque.

Agree. Leaving him out does more damage to the HOF than to Mr. Bonds.

(12-05-2022, 12:03 PM)Phogge Wrote: Both. Been around on the field when both were guilty of being an asshole. Add PEDS and you have two strikes. Maybe 2.99 strikes.

Now do Ty Cobb.

Cobb was a jerk. No doubt. But much of what we think we know about him may be false. A narrative created by a writer first run in “ True Detective “.

A good read on this is “Ty Cobb: A Terrible Beauty.” By Charles Leesheen. Not an exoneration of Cobb. But a suggestion that he was a product of his times and in many ways no worse than his peers. Baseball was a game played by rough and tumble dudes back in that day.

Also, Leeshen writes that some of the most negative stories written on him are false. Interesting read with some terrific stories and anecdotes about baseball around the turn of the 20th century.

Cobb as an 18 year old rookie was mercilessly hazed. (He also learned on his first day in MLB that his mother shot and killed his father.) In part because the players knew right from the start that he was much better than them. In part cause that’s what they did to rookies.

The first true superstar of baseball. No question, a jerk. But maybe not quite the monster he’s been made out to be.

His daughter, Shirley Cobb, had a very good bookstore in Menlo Park.

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - Mick - 12-06-2022

(12-06-2022, 01:19 PM)lex24 Wrote: Cobb as an 18 year old rookie was mercilessly hazed. (He also learned on his first day in MLB that his mother shot and killed his father.) In part because the players knew right from the start that he was much better than them. In part cause that’s what they did to rookies.

As a tall, skinny rookie in 1905, Cobb wasn't all that great (batted .238, OPS was .544). He didn't start, and only played in 41 games. But his talent exploded his second year, in 1906, and that's when the jealousy that Lex refers to arrived in spades. Cobb was tall for the time, 6'1", and weighed about 175. Cobb was the youngest on that team by at least six years, and he was brash, and in those days, men settled scores with their fists. A catcher named Boss Schmidt joined the team in 1906, he was 5'10" and weighed 200 pounds, and he hated Cobb. Schmidt was a coal miner and a boxer. He couldn't hit, but could handle pitchers and had a cannon for an arm. Schmidt beat the heck out of Cobb, leaving him with two black eyes. They fought another time after that.

Cobb and Schmidt ultimately became friendly, if not friends, and when Schmidt's fortunes went bad at the beginning of the Great Depression, Cobb helped him out financially.

Interesting NY Post article on Cobb and race, from 2015: How Ty Cobb was framed as a racist (nypost.com)

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - BostonCard - 12-06-2022

(12-06-2022, 12:03 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Like humans shouldn't be calling balls and strikes anymore, baseball writers shouldn't be voting on who is in the Hall of Fame anymore.

The numbers are what matters. The personalities don't.

Uh, that's not what the written criteria for the hall of fame says:

https://bbwaa.com/hof-elec-req/

Quote:Voting — Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

I get that in practice, as with the college football award that shall not be named, in practice, "...integrity, sportsmanship, character..." are mere buzzwords, but just because you think that there is some platonic ideal objective way to identify who is hall of fame worthy and who isn't (which, by the way, there is not, because different people value different aspects of a players contributions; for example, would you prioritize a player who is brilliant for a few years but their career was cut short due to injury, or a player who has tremendous career numbers due to longevity, but even at their peak paled compared to other players).

Anyway, I very much disagree with your premise that a) personalities don't (or shouldn't) matter with regards to the HoF and b) that numbers, per se, are what count. Numbers are meaningless without context, so even if you want to emphasize playing ability and contribution to the team (even if you can measure them objectively with something like WAR), the HoF should never be and has never been, about a checklist of items.

BC

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - OutsiderFan - 12-06-2022

(12-06-2022, 05:07 PM)BostonCard Wrote:
(12-06-2022, 12:03 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Like humans shouldn't be calling balls and strikes anymore, baseball writers shouldn't be voting on who is in the Hall of Fame anymore.

The numbers are what matters. The personalities don't.

Uh, that's not what the written criteria for the hall of fame says:

https://bbwaa.com/hof-elec-req/

Quote:Voting — Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

I get that in practice, as with the college football award that shall not be named, in practice, "...integrity, sportsmanship, character..." are mere buzzwords, but just because you think that there is some platonic ideal objective way to identify who is hall of fame worthy and who isn't (which, by the way, there is not, because different people value different aspects of a players contributions; for example, would you prioritize a player who is brilliant for a few years but their career was cut short due to injury, or a player who has tremendous career numbers due to longevity, but even at their peak paled compared to other players).

Anyway, I very much disagree with your premise that a) personalities don't (or shouldn't) matter with regards to the HoF and b) that numbers, per se, are what count. Numbers are meaningless without context, so even if you want to emphasize playing ability and contribution to the team (even if you can measure them objectively with something like WAR), the HoF should never be and has never been, about a checklist of items.

BC

The Hall of Fame has lost so much credibility that its criteria mean nothing to me. I only care about the best players and what they did on the field. It matters not an iota to me what they do off the field. I've already reconciled the fact that drugs were being used in baseball for decades before the steroid era, but nobody who did them before the steroid era was held out of the Hall to my knowledge because of it.

The three best players I saw with my own eyes - Pete Rose, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemons - are all not in the HoF. That makes the rules a joke to me and leads me to conclude the writers have no business using arbitrary criteria like "character" and "sportsmanship" to decide who gets recognized.

Please contemplate the absurdity of having Harold Baines and Fred McGriff in the Hall of Fame, but Pete Rose and Barry Bonds out.

One more thing on Bonds. His dad was an MLB player and he saw how the media treated him. Barry never trusted reporters and he in fact resented them. Whiny, vindictive men who never played the game are deciding who will be recognized as the best players ever.

In 50 years when nobody alive will have seen Barry Bonds play, imagine how young baseball fans will feel about his generation's best player not being in the Hall of Fame. It will be like learning in college that American Armed forces brutally slaughtered Native Americans, when in K-12 you were taught the U.S. "settled the West" with no mention of how violent and brutal the United States were to native people.

You simply lose trust in institutions when they don't tell you the truth. Barry Bonds is #4 in All-Time WAR, behind only Babe Ruth, Walter Johnson, and Cy Young. Roger Clemens is #8. Pete Rose is the all-time hits leader. NOBODY is going to give a scintilla of a shit about what these guys did off the field when they are gone, and more importantly, when the holier than thou "Star Trek geeks" that are the baseball writers denying them entry, are gone.

At least if you just run the numbers you don't get writers with agendas keeping players deserving of enshrinement out of the Hall of Fame that tells the story of the game's best players.

Just create a formula for selection and run it every year to get the new entrants. The idea of lobbying writers for votes is just anachronistic in today's baseball that is so comprehensively driven by numbers.

RE: MLB Hall of Fame - cardcrimson - 12-06-2022

(12-06-2022, 05:34 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: The Hall of Fame has lost so much credibility that its criteria mean nothing to me. I only care about the best players and what they did on the field. It matters not an iota to me what they do off the field. I've already reconciled the fact that drugs were being used in baseball for decades before the steroid era, but nobody who did them before the steroid era was held out of the Hall to my knowledge because of it.

Um, it's argued that Bonds and Clemens (e, not o) used performance enhancing drugs while they played on the field. Rose bet on baseball games while a manager in the dugout. So I'm perplexed by your on the field, off the field distinction.

Last I checked, the Hall is an independent, non-profit organization that can set its own rules, processes and procedures. If you don't like them, don't go visit. If you want to change it, become a sports writer or a donor.

On another note, I'm surprised you're not upset that Curt Schilling hasn't been elected to the Hall. Three rings, MVP of the Series and the LCS, 3100+ K's, 210+ wins. Roy Halladay got in a couple of years ago with fewer wins and 1000 fewer Ks, and no rings. Where's the outrage?