I Miss McNulty
Posted 06 January 2015 - 04:37 PM
Like I said, not if it takes a vote away. Next year, for example, I might be willing to throw one of those votes at Jason Kendall or Gary Matthews Jr. But, the ballot is going to be crowded again, so no chance. Same in 2017, when Arthur Rhodes and Melvin Mora get their year in the sun.
But what happens if 75% of the other voters want to jokingly throw a vote towards Arthur Rhodes?
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
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 04:50 PM
But what happens if 75% of the other voters want to jokingly throw a vote towards Arthur Rhodes?
Who would, outside of Baltimore and Seattle?
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 04:52 PM
By the way, one of the Boone voters was Hal McCoy in Cincinnati, and...he's got a reason.
I Miss McNulty
Posted 06 January 2015 - 04:59 PM
By the way, one of the Boone voters was Hal McCoy in Cincinnati, and...he's got a reason.
This is a great article but sort of illustrates my point. You shouldn't vote for a guy because he's "nice" or "your buddy" or whatever. Just like someone like Eddie Murray shouldn't have his demeanor held against him. It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Who You Like.
But maybe I'm just being a cynical hard ass.
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
Owner
Posted 06 January 2015 - 06:20 PM
This is a great article but sort of illustrates my point. You shouldn't vote for a guy because he's "nice" or "your buddy" or whatever. Just like someone like Eddie Murray shouldn't have his demeanor held against him. It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Who You Like.
But maybe I'm just being a cynical hard ass.
No you aren't, you are 100% correct.
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 06:50 PM
Somebody voted for Darrin Erstad, too.
I have no problem with people being willing to throw a random guy an "emotional" vote like that. Unless that vote takes one away from a more-deserving candidate.
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 08:18 PM
You have no problem with someone taking a privilege like this and making a joke out of it?
Exactly which rock are you crawling out from under? Plymouth? Ayers? Fraggle?
Owner
Posted 06 January 2015 - 08:25 PM
Exactly which rock are you crawling out from under? Plymouth? Ayers? Fraggle?
Yeah... people have done it before... yes, there are larger things in the world to scream about..... but when there are at-least 10 viable candidates for selection, and 4 get in... it is pretty insulting imo to see Erstad get even 1 vote.
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 08:30 PM
Yeah... people have done it before... yes, there are larger things in the world to scream about..... but when there are at-least 10 viable candidates for selection, and 4 get in... it is pretty insulting imo to see Erstad get even 1 vote.
What if there aren't ten candidates? Or you don't think there are ten candidates (because that opinion can differ within reason)?
Owner
Posted 06 January 2015 - 08:37 PM
What if there aren't ten candidates? Or you don't think there are ten candidates (because that opinion can differ within reason)?
I struggle with the idea that anyone could have within reason really articulated that there were not 10 legitimate candidates.
Going with that hypothetical... a person voting for a candidate like Erstad should lose their vote faster than Le Batard lost his right to vote last year imo.
EDIT: Some of this is just venting. The whole process is annoying... and I frankly think it's crazy that there is probably better debate and critical thinking here in these BSL threads vs. what some writers with votes exercised.
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 08:38 PM
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 08:45 PM
I struggle with the idea that anyone could have within reason really articulated that there were not 10 legitimate candidates.
Going with that hypothetical... a person voting for a candidate like Erstad should lose their vote faster than Le Batard lost his right to vote last year imo.
EDIT: Some of this is just venting. The whole process is annoying... and I frankly think it's crazy that there is probably better debate and critical thinking here in these BSL threads vs. what some writers with votes exercised.
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 08:46 PM
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 08:48 PM
I'm suprised more people arent up in arms about Smoltz. Im ok with it, but I probably wouldnt have put him in my 10.
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 08:56 PM
I'm perfectly fine with him getting elected, but I can't understand why he got more votes than Mussina and Schilling combined with plenty of room to spare.
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 09:03 PM
I'm perfectly fine with him getting elected, but I can't understand why he got more votes than Mussina and Schilling combined with plenty of room to spare.
But Smoltz was in the playoffs so often!
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 09:05 PM
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 09:52 PM
I'm perfectly fine with him getting elected, but I can't understand why he got more votes than Mussina and Schilling combined with plenty of room to spare.
Saves.
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 09:53 PM
If Mussina had his same career with the Braves, he'd be a Hall of Famer today.
If he had the same career with only one team (Orioles OR Yankees), same.
HOF
Posted 06 January 2015 - 09:55 PM
What is the point in voting for Erstad? And is that point a valid one?
http://www.baseball-...erstada01.shtml
If the voter gave a justification, I bet it would be his Andersonian 2000 season.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
