Red Mosquito

Electromatic wrote:The voting process is probably the worst part of the hall of fame. They almost need a group of curators for that job.

The journalist aspect of the whole thing is just sort of nonsensical.

In 140 years to only have 215 players enshrined is a pretty good number to me it's pretty difficult to have any sort of perfect system.

I just find it a little ridiculous that the all time hits leader isn't in the nations museum of baseball even with all his lies and comical behavior.

They could have a whole wing dedicated to miscreants, cheating and nefarious behavior.

One day I'm bringing my kid, we're going to talk baseball and we will discuss honorable behavior and the lack thereof.

I'm just not sure a lot of guys in the steroid era, even if they have numbers are really hall of famers. Bonds and Clemens are...I really don't feel like Mcgwire or Sosa belong. Good players, not Hall of Famers.

philpritchard wrote:

Electromatic wrote:The voting process is probably the worst part of the hall of fame. They almost need a group of curators for that job.

The journalist aspect of the whole thing is just sort of nonsensical.

In 140 years to only have 215 players enshrined is a pretty good number to me it's pretty difficult to have any sort of perfect system.

I just find it a little ridiculous that the all time hits leader isn't in the nations museum of baseball even with all his lies and comical behavior.

They could have a whole wing dedicated to miscreants, cheating and nefarious behavior.

One day I'm bringing my kid, we're going to talk baseball and we will discuss honorable behavior and the lack thereof.

I'm just not sure a lot of guys in the steroid era, even if they have numbers are really hall of famers. Bonds and Clemens are...I really don't feel like Mcgwire or Sosa belong. Good players, not Hall of Famers.

McGwire and Sosa are close enough to borderline candidates that I can understand not voting for them. There's just no justification for leaving Bagwell off, regardless of the era he played in.

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Electromatic wrote:The voting process is probably the worst part of the hall of fame. They almost need a group of curators for that job.

The journalist aspect of the whole thing is just sort of nonsensical.

In 140 years to only have 215 players enshrined is a pretty good number to me it's pretty difficult to have any sort of perfect system.

I just find it a little ridiculous that the all time hits leader isn't in the nations museum of baseball even with all his lies and comical behavior.

They could have a whole wing dedicated to miscreants, cheating and nefarious behavior.

One day I'm bringing my kid, we're going to talk baseball and we will discuss honorable behavior and the lack thereof.

I'm just not sure a lot of guys in the steroid era, even if they have numbers are really hall of famers. Bonds and Clemens are...I really don't feel like Mcgwire or Sosa belong. Good players, not Hall of Famers.

McGwire and Sosa are close enough to borderline candidates that I can understand not voting for them. There's just no justification for leaving Bagwell off, regardless of the era he played in.

Agreed, I really don't like when guys don't get votes because people assume they juiced even if there isn't a shred of proof.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Electromatic wrote:The voting process is probably the worst part of the hall of fame. They almost need a group of curators for that job.

The journalist aspect of the whole thing is just sort of nonsensical.

In 140 years to only have 215 players enshrined is a pretty good number to me it's pretty difficult to have any sort of perfect system.

I just find it a little ridiculous that the all time hits leader isn't in the nations museum of baseball even with all his lies and comical behavior.

They could have a whole wing dedicated to miscreants, cheating and nefarious behavior.

One day I'm bringing my kid, we're going to talk baseball and we will discuss honorable behavior and the lack thereof.

I'm just not sure a lot of guys in the steroid era, even if they have numbers are really hall of famers. Bonds and Clemens are...I really don't feel like Mcgwire or Sosa belong. Good players, not Hall of Famers.

McGwire and Sosa are close enough to borderline candidates that I can understand not voting for them. There's just no justification for leaving Bagwell off, regardless of the era he played in.

Agreed, I really don't like when guys don't get votes because people assume they juiced even if there isn't a shred of proof.

If Bagwell is in then Sheffield is in. Balco link be damned.

numbers wrote:Skitch's Tigers Twitter Community absolutely sold me on Trammell and I now think it's an outrage how low his totals are.

@SkitchP wrote:

numbers wrote:Skitch's Tigers Twitter Community absolutely sold me on Trammell and I now think it's an outrage how low his totals are.

and honestly, most of the national guys are more outraged about Whitaker.

numbers wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

numbers wrote:Skitch's Tigers Twitter Community absolutely sold me on Trammell and I now think it's an outrage how low his totals are.

and honestly, most of the national guys are more outraged about Whitaker.

When you compare Trammell to comparable SS's that are already in, it's a no brainer.

cutuphalfdead wrote:I'm not sold on Trammell.

Coach wrote:Boomer Esiason during one of those "cbs sports radio minutes" made a pretty compelling case for Don Mattingly, which now has me second guessing his status. I guess he's out for good now unless the Veterans Committee steps up.

Trammel was HUGE when I was a kid. Don't know enough about his stats/intangibles, but in the kids baseball card trading world, we all coveted his cards.

philpritchard wrote:

Coach wrote:Boomer Esiason during one of those "cbs sports radio minutes" made a pretty compelling case for Don Mattingly, which now has me second guessing his status. I guess he's out for good now unless the Veterans Committee steps up.

Trammel was HUGE when I was a kid. Don't know enough about his stats/intangibles, but in the kids baseball card trading world, we all coveted his cards.

I can't possibly imagine someone putting together a reasonable case for Mattingly because he's so far away from being a legitimate Hall of Famer, but I would be interested in hearing the argument.

@SkitchP wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Coach wrote:Boomer Esiason during one of those "cbs sports radio minutes" made a pretty compelling case for Don Mattingly, which now has me second guessing his status. I guess he's out for good now unless the Veterans Committee steps up.

Trammel was HUGE when I was a kid. Don't know enough about his stats/intangibles, but in the kids baseball card trading world, we all coveted his cards.

I can't possibly imagine someone putting together a reasonable case for Mattingly because he's so far away from being a legitimate Hall of Famer, but I would be interested in hearing the argument.

It worked for Jim Rice.

Coach wrote:Boomer Esiason during one of those "cbs sports radio minutes" made a pretty compelling case for Don Mattingly, which now has me second guessing his status. I guess he's out for good now unless the Veterans Committee steps up.

Trammel was HUGE when I was a kid. Don't know enough about his stats/intangibles, but in the kids baseball card trading world, we all coveted his cards.

philpritchard wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Coach wrote:Boomer Esiason during one of those "cbs sports radio minutes" made a pretty compelling case for Don Mattingly, which now has me second guessing his status. I guess he's out for good now unless the Veterans Committee steps up.

Trammel was HUGE when I was a kid. Don't know enough about his stats/intangibles, but in the kids baseball card trading world, we all coveted his cards.

I can't possibly imagine someone putting together a reasonable case for Mattingly because he's so far away from being a legitimate Hall of Famer, but I would be interested in hearing the argument.

It worked for Jim Rice.

Rice was a much better candidate than Mattingly, though. He still shouldn't be in, but he was a lot closer.

philpritchard wrote:

Coach wrote:Boomer Esiason during one of those "cbs sports radio minutes" made a pretty compelling case for Don Mattingly, which now has me second guessing his status. I guess he's out for good now unless the Veterans Committee steps up.

Trammel was HUGE when I was a kid. Don't know enough about his stats/intangibles, but in the kids baseball card trading world, we all coveted his cards.

I can't possibly imagine someone putting together a reasonable case for Mattingly because he's so far away from being a legitimate Hall of Famer, but I would be interested in hearing the argument.