Photo

BSL: The Hall of Fame Quagmire and My Hypothetical Ballot


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 08 January 2014 - 12:23 AM

My first article since writing for my high school paper.Please check it out and let me know what you think. Of course if you want to pass it along to anyone else that may be interested, that would be great too.

http://baltimorespor...hetical-ballot/
  • BSLChrisStoner, SportsGuy, Russ and 1 other like this

#2 McNulty

McNulty

    la cerveza está muy fría

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,667 posts
  • LocationBS

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:16 AM

WHY ARE YOU YELLING AT US?


  • DJ MC likes this

@fuzydunlop


#3 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:37 AM

WHY ARE YOU YELLING AT US?


Umm, thanks for the feedback.

#4 McNulty

McNulty

    la cerveza está muy fría

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,667 posts
  • LocationBS

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:44 AM

Umm, thanks for the feedback.

 

I was referencing the all caps thread title.

 

Its well written.  I agree with your choices.  Just about all of them actually.  I asked Jay Jaffe a few weeks ago how many players are above the JAWS threshold and he said 14 if you include Biggio as a catcher.  It looks like you included 15 as 'should be in'.  That's pretty close.

 

Its unfortunate that there has been so much written and so much outrage on this already, and I fear that we are suffering some burnout.  Its obvious that changes need to be made, and they won't be made. 


@fuzydunlop


#5 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:50 AM

Ah, the caps were unintentional. Thanks. Biggio is HOF worthy as a second baseman too IMO.<br Are you and Jaffe hanging out now or was this on twitter?

#6 McNulty

McNulty

    la cerveza está muy fría

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,667 posts
  • LocationBS

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:00 AM

Ah, the caps were unintentional. Thanks. Biggio is HOF worthy as a second baseman too IMO.<br /><br />Are you and Jaffe hanging out now or was this on twitter?

 

Twitter.  We just grabbed a beer once.

 

I doubt he'll have many openings this week but I'm sure he'd come on your show if you ask him.


@fuzydunlop


#7 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:03 AM

Ah, the caps were unintentional. Thanks. Biggio is HOF worthy as a second baseman too IMO.

Are you and Jaffe hanging out now or was this on twitter?

 
Twitter.  We just grabbed a beer once.
 
I doubt he'll have many openings this week but I'm sure he'd come on your show if you ask him.

Yeah, I'm sure he's busy now, but that would be fantastic. I sent him this article in hopes he'll read it.

#8 Pedro Cerrano

Pedro Cerrano

    I Miss McNulty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,435 posts
  • LocationEllicott City, MD

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:07 AM

Appreciate the effort but the HOF is turning into an absolute joke. If they actually let this clown vote for Jack Morris and not Greg Maddux and let him keep his ballot, what's the point?
  • Mike in STL likes this

There is baseball, and occasionally there are other things of note

"Now OPS sucks.  Got it."

"Making his own olive brine is peak Mackus."

"I'm too hungover to watch a loss." - McNulty

@bopper33


#9 FlavaDave10

FlavaDave10

    Dave

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,972 posts
  • LocationBalmer

Posted 08 January 2014 - 08:46 AM

In all honesty, I would have left Maddux off my ballot simply because he's a given to get in. I pretty much would have voted for the precise same guys Mike did except replace Maddux with Glavine. Really wish I could vote for Biggio, but I'd give my vote to Raffy because he needs it. 


"We're not going to be f***ing suck this year" - Alex Ovechkin

 

@BaltimoreDavey


#10 Pedro Cerrano

Pedro Cerrano

    I Miss McNulty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,435 posts
  • LocationEllicott City, MD

Posted 08 January 2014 - 10:10 AM

Well this goes back to the unanimous selection issue.  I know a bunch of O's fans, myself included, were pretty disappointed that Cal didn't go in with 100% of the vote.  There are just some guys that deserve it -- Maddux, a top 10 pitcher ever, deserves it.

 

The voting process itself is flawed, but it's fundamentally wrong, IMO, to leave a guy like Maddux off in favor of Palmeiro, steroids issue aside.


There is baseball, and occasionally there are other things of note

"Now OPS sucks.  Got it."

"Making his own olive brine is peak Mackus."

"I'm too hungover to watch a loss." - McNulty

@bopper33


#11 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 08 January 2014 - 10:25 AM

In all honesty, I would have left Maddux off my ballot simply because he's a given to get in. I pretty much would have voted for the precise same guys Mike did except replace Maddux with Glavine. Really wish I could vote for Biggio, but I'd give my vote to Raffy because he needs it. 


Glavine also seems like a given to get in.

#12 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,680 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 08 January 2014 - 10:31 AM

Well this goes back to the unanimous selection issue.  I know a bunch of O's fans, myself included, were pretty disappointed that Cal didn't go in with 100% of the vote.  There are just some guys that deserve it -- Maddux, a top 10 pitcher ever, deserves it.

 

The voting process itself is flawed, but it's fundamentally wrong, IMO, to leave a guy like Maddux off in favor of Palmeiro, steroids issue aside.

It goes to the very heart of the problem. Because the Hall itself is shirking its responsibility on clarifying the voting rules, the writers are forced to do that themselves, and end up doing so in varying ways. So that splits the vote so much that no one can get elected and backs up candidates that should have no business remaining on the ballot as long as they do. Add in the 10-player limit* and you get people needing to make those kinds of decisions.

 

*Despite all of the talk about a limit, it should be noted that it was never an issue until the past couple of years. Only when the ballot started backing up did people start needing to vote for 10. Clear up that issue, and I don't think you have to worry about a limit.

 

I think Joe Posnanski had an interesting point when he said that he thought about leaving off slam-dunk candidates to give votes for more marginal ones, but decided that it would not be within the spirit of the rules.


@DJ_McCann

#13 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 155,717 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:04 AM

Jaffe will be on with Lance Monday.
  • McNulty likes this

#14 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:44 AM

This was posted in the comment section:

 

Hank Moody says: Too many players on that ballot.

As for gaining an edge, it’s one thing to steal a sign, cork a bat or throw a doctored ball. Those infractions can be caught on the field by an umpire. It’s another thing when players take measures which require others to ivasively inject something into their bodies requiring others to take the same physical risks of their well being to keep up.

 

Yes, Hank, you can make that distinction even though cheating is still cheating. However, as noted, steroids have been prevalent in baseball since the 60's and greenies before then. Many believe that greenies had a similar impact to steroids and it is obviously an off the field and chemical way of gaining an edge. So why the distinction there? 



#15 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:46 AM

Appreciate the effort but the HOF is turning into an absolute joke. If they actually let this clown vote for Jack Morris and not Greg Maddux and let him keep his ballot, what's the point?

 

Are you anti Morris?



#16 Pedro Cerrano

Pedro Cerrano

    I Miss McNulty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,435 posts
  • LocationEllicott City, MD

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:48 AM

Are you anti Morris?

 

I do not believe Jack Morris is a HOF if that is what you're asking.


There is baseball, and occasionally there are other things of note

"Now OPS sucks.  Got it."

"Making his own olive brine is peak Mackus."

"I'm too hungover to watch a loss." - McNulty

@bopper33


#17 SportsGuy

SportsGuy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,979 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:49 AM

Good article Mike.

 

I guess I will put my ballot in here:

 

Mussina

Schilling

Bonds

Clemens

Raffy

Thomas

Bagwell

Raines

Biggio

Edgar

 

I am leaving off Maddux and Glavine simply from a strategic, they will get in regardless, point of view.  They are both clearly HOFers.

 

I am going with Biggio in hopes that he gets the 75% and is off the ballot next year, giving guys like Mussina and Schilling a better chance to get in.

 

Raffy should get in and I am trying to keep his number at the 5% mark.

 

Of the "borderline" guys, I went with Edgar over Walker and Trammel(2 guys I feel should be in) because Edgar didn't have the help of Coors Field like Walker did and did something elite on a level Trammel didn't.  Gotta find some reason to leave player X off the ballot because of player Y and being great at one thing is where I am going in that comparison.



#18 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:49 AM

I do not believe Jack Morris is a HOF if that is what you're asking.

 

Ha, yes, I didn't mean to ask if you have it out for him or anything.  :lol:

 

I would have thought Morris would be right up your alley. The guy in your avatar thinks he should be in the Hall!  ;)



#19 SportsGuy

SportsGuy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,979 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:51 AM

This was posted in the comment section:

 

 

Yes, Hank, you can make that distinction even though cheating is still cheating. However, as noted, steroids have been prevalent in baseball since the 60's and greenies before then. Many believe that greenies had a similar impact to steroids and it is obviously an off the field and chemical way of gaining an edge. So why the distinction there? 

Even beyond this, why is it that a guy like Gaylord Perry is CELEBRATED for cheating but we try to put Bonds and Clemens in jail over it?

 

Amazing that people just don't see the distinctions here.



#20 Pedro Cerrano

Pedro Cerrano

    I Miss McNulty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,435 posts
  • LocationEllicott City, MD

Posted 08 January 2014 - 12:01 PM

Ha, yes, I didn't mean to ask if you have it out for him or anything.  :lol:

 

I would have thought Morris would be right up your alley. The guy in your avatar thinks he should be in the Hall!  ;)

 

Nah -- even I can agree with you nerds that wins are overrated :-)

 

As for the avatar, if you and BNick get your act together you can change it at any time...


There is baseball, and occasionally there are other things of note

"Now OPS sucks.  Got it."

"Making his own olive brine is peak Mackus."

"I'm too hungover to watch a loss." - McNulty

@bopper33





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=