The purpose of any museum is to educate; to tell the historically accurate history of a subject. It's not about, or, at least, should not be about confirming what/who everybody already knows. I've seen a HoF voter reference the fame aspect and I think it's silly. As a baseball writer, who, presumably, has much greater insight into the game, your job is not to promote what everybody already knows; it's to provide a much deeper understanding/appreciation for those who made the game great.
Luke Gregerson has a better ERA & FIP than Trevor Hoffman... Who knew we already had a HOF-caliber closer?
Yeah, but prior to last year Gregerson had blown 63% of his save chances, I mean what a scrub. We all know the save is the most accurate and soundly decided stat in all of sports.
10 years after they retired, these guys were probably famous and everyone knew who they were that had any following of baseball. That said, it surprises me that the HoF is still a big deal. I do like following the discussions because they are amusing.
Rogers Hornsby was my manager. He called me a talking pile of pig****. And that was when my parents drove all the way down from Michigan to see me play.
"Billy Wagner Analytics" **** it, coach, I'm throwing him the 12the heater. He's only fouled off 10 in a row, no way he'll catch up to this one.
While he is still far away from getting in, he’s absolutely trending in the right direction and has 5 more years of eligibility. He still probably doesn’t get in, but he has a much better chance now than he did at this time last year. Also, for the next few years there aren’t any slam-dunk first ballot type of guys (except Big Papi) so that should really help Wagner.
Off-topic, but the above graph shows 6 different player careers (no relievers) depicted by their fWARs from their best season to their worst. 5 of these players have been voted into the HOF. Let's play match the color to the HOF Vote % for 1st Year of Eligibility. 68.2 41.7 1 99.7 99.3 97.2 Answers Spoiler 68.2 Green 41.7 Blue 1 Black 99.7 Yellow 99.3 Red 97.2 Purple
The educational argument U make is for the museum, but not it’s actual hall of fame where the mission is to educate by presenting the legendary players. U need and should be legendary/famous in your own time to make the Hall. I don’t mind putting Wagner into the museum or library, but not the hall of inductees itself.
Agree. It's a position just like any other. Involved in a lot more games than a starter. And very crucial position. How many extra games did Mariano Rivera win for the Yankees over the years? Have a great reliever helps all your other pitchers. Not have one does the reverse. So, they impact the entire game, in dictating how the pitching staff gets used. Now, for a reliever not a closer, I might buy that argument..you'd have to be an OUTSTANDING reliefer...and if you were that good...why weren't you starting or closing? Satchel Paige, but all sorts of things make his case unique.
Wagner did have some 'fame'. Didn't Bonds call him a baaad man? Personally, I think putting a little fear into Bonds maybe gets you into the hall by itself. But also speaks to how hitters felt about him. That to me is a key criteria. Were the hitters of his area scared to face him? If so, then maybe he belongs in the hall.
