Various "cheating" and other negatives have always been a part of baseball and always been part of the narrative of HOF voting. My opinion is that facts stats and accomishments minus any negatives should determine whether a player is in. Simple plusses on one side of the ledger and minuses on the other. If a player would normally be 100% then he probably gets in at 80% If a player is 80% before factoring negatives then he likely doesn't get in at 60% Of course different issues would reduce accordingly. Example 1 failed PED test -15% 2 failed PED tests -26% Nearly unanimous belief but no failed test -10% 1 DUI -10% The point is that any negative should not keep a player out but should reduce chances some amount depending on the offense Anyway, that's the system I would like to see.
I'll never forget the fat **** from Philly who didn't vote for Nolan Ryan because his whole reasoning was "I wouldn't want him starting game 7 of the WS"
Exactly. Just put the guys in, tell the story on the plaque. It's beyond stupid that Rose, Clemens, and Bonds aren't in. Beyond stupid.
It would be pointless to create a wing because the plaques are already in a huge room that makes the plaques seem tiny. They are for the most part, pretty non-descript. Giving a separate room or wing only increases their visibility. The real concern about their election will be their induction which is the one time they are truly being celebrated rather than just remembered. I expect them to get in eventually, but maybe not in the near term.
Interesting. Do you induct cheaters and gamblers who had the resume without needing to cheat, but then not allow them to give a speech?
I think it is a good idea. Wouldn't be shocked to see them voted in after they die just for that kind of reason.
Those are sort of important things for a closer. I would be good with no relievers in. They really aren’t that valuable deserving enshrinement. If you are going to let them in then I guess you should probably elect Wagner.
Looked at numbers and Mariano Rivera is cool at 54 WAR. Goose Gossage at 38 probably isn’t worthy. All the other closers are between 20 and 30 WAR. By comparison Lance Berkman had 52 WAR and Jim Edmonds had 61 WAR and neither were close to be getting in. It’s silly. If you were a really good pitcher you wouldn’t be a relief pitcher. Those are the best of the failed/guys not good enough to start. Congrats at being best of that group I guess. Shouldn’t be HOF (other than Mariano who was so damn good at it he got to 50+ WAR which is table stakes for the HOF at every other position).
Once they put Trevor Hoffman in that opened the door for guys like Wags, he should be in. Precedent has to mean something. These voters are sanctimonious turds.
My opinion means nothing, but it's: Rivera Hoffman maybe: Fingers Wagner Hall of Really Great: Gossage Lee Smith Sutter Franco Eckersly Others
Wasn’t Eck a first ballot HOFer well before the “precedent” was set with Hoffman. Maybe it was his time as a starter, or being so dominant that he actually won the MVP award as a reliever, but voters clearly valued something that went beyond saves or counting stats. Wagner’s biggest knock was not having any high profile (i.e. - playoffs/World Series) saves. In fact he was awful more than good in the playoffs.
