I think it’s likelier that he gambled on baseball*. Or cheated on his wife.** Or has had carnal knowledge of the Commissioner of Baseball***
(*see Rose, P.)
I don’t like voting for active players, and I feel pretty good about indulging that bias while people are pretty well electing active players by the carload.
(** see Puckett, K.)
I will look at your links, though, and seriously re-consider Traynor.
(*** made you look!)
Fair enough!
Although your references to Rose and Puckett bring up an interesting question: I’m assuming that we’ve got no character clause in our SDMB Hall of Fame, and that most people’s considerations have been predominantly performance-based, at the plate and in the field. Steroids is obviously a place where character meets performances (as in, Player X wouldn’t have put up those numbers if he hadn’t used steroids – see the negligible support for Mark McGwire in the first basemen thread), but otherwise I’d be surprised to see a large-scale refusal to vote for someone because of off-the-field issues. I assume, for example, that Ty Cobb will make it in handily. (And, unlike Chipper, I don’t think Puckett or Rose merit induction regardless, so I don’t have to consider their character. I’m certainly voting for Bonds, though.)
You–don’t --feel–the–ALL-TIME HITS LEADER–merits induction?
I mean, I detest the guy, but I can’t see a rationale (absent ethical considerations) keeping him out of any HoF than means anything. Please explicate.
And pre-emptively, let’s get this discussion in before the OFers come up: would you also exclude Joe Jackson?
Into the MLB Hall of Fame? Absolutely, absent other considerations (like the character clause). Into the SDMB Hall of Fame, at least as one of the top ten best right fielders or left fielders? No, because the competition is way too stiff. Will I consider him in the wild card round? Sure. I honestly don’t know how I’ll come down on that. Rose is kinda overrated: he had a pretty good peak, but most of his value is tied up in the longevity of his career…which isn’t insignificant, but doesn’t necessarily wow you (other than the counting stats). I might take Ralph Kiner’s 10 seasons over Rose’s 24. Not saying for sure, but I might.
As for Joe Jackson, he was a great player, and worlds better at the plate than Rose. Again, I don’t know if he’d make it into my top ten left fielders, but if not, I’d have to give him a long, hard look in the wild card rounds.
Does that answer your questions? 
Intersting enough, Rose’s best ten-year run absolutely crushes Kiner’s career for value, according to WARP. Just sayin’.
Wade Boggs
George Brett
Darrell Evans
Chipper Jones
Eddie Mathews
Graig Nettles
Brooks Robinson
Scott Rolen
Ron Santo
Mike Schmidt
Is WARP position-neutral? And are those ten years roughly consecutive, or at least bunched together? If the answer to both those questions is yes, then never mind, my assertion was idiotic. (It may, of course, be idiotic anyway.)
Brett
Boggs
Brooks
Molitor
Schmidt
Mathews
Chipper Jones
George Kell
Dick Allen
Home run Baker
Wade Boggs
Ken Boyer
George Brett
Eddie Mathews
John McGraw
Graig Nettles
Brooks Robinson
Ron Santo
Mike Schmidt
Pie Traynor
Schmidt
Brett
Matthews
Boggs
Molitor
Collins
Baker
Robinson
Santo
Jones
Molitor played
3rd base 791
2b 400
ib 197
of 50
Looks like a 3rd baseman to me. Played DH a bit too.
Frank “Home Run” Baker
Clete Boyer
Ken Boyer
George Brett
Darrell Evans
Chipper Jones
Eddie Mathews
Brooks Robinson
Mike Schmidt
Pie Traynor
11th and invalid vote - Harmon Killebrew - 'cause I promised 
Yes, I realize that my votes for the Boyers have bumped Collins and Santo or Boggs.
I have every intention of voting for Cobb, Jackson, Rose, and Bonds.
To be fair, Bonds had a Hall of Fame career before he ever touched steroids. A first ballot career even had he aged normally.
Power isn’t the be-all and end-all of offense, not by a long shot. Boggs, starting in his first full year, had the following on-base percentages:
.444
.407
.450
.453
.461
.476
.430
I’m sorry, but that represents as high an offensive peak as you’ll see from a guy playing at the hot corner outside of the Top Three (Schmidt, Mathews & Brett-maybe on Brett). And he hit enough doubles with a high average that his slugging wasn’t bad (typically in the high .400’s even outside of 1987). Heck it’s only 20 points less than Boyer (yes in a different park in a dead-ball league. Still…).
Now I agree that there’s this thorny issue of why his runs scored totals aren’t nearly as impressive as they should be (Rickey Henderson scored 39% of the time he was on base, driven in by other people; Boggs only scored 32% of the time he was on base (by his teammates), and really that is the only knock against him; scored less often than the all-time stolen base leader (looks pretty good actually once you consider Rickey’s 1406 steals).
Remember also that a walk keeps the inning from ending, at least 1/3rd of the time. Say Marty Barrett singles with two out, Boggs walks, and Jim Rice singles to drive in Barrett, and then Bill Buckner grounds out to end the inning. I’d bet that kind of thing happened often enough that the Sox got a lot of extra runs out of it.
I already hashed out the home/road split thing in that other thread; a guy who can get on base 1 out of 2 times at home (as Boggs did in 3 seasons) can certainly play for me (reread this sentence again, slowly). I had a college professor, big Boston fan, who absolutely hated Boggs, didn’t think he was a team player (despite the fact that he worked like crazy to get his D up to snuff) and didn’t help the Sox win. Well, he did, more than almost all 3B in history. Unless you believe in a very small Hall Boggs deserves your vote.
Boggs standing in the league
On base % 1983 to 91 2nd in 1984 ,first in all other years
Batting ave 1,3,1,1,1,1,1,1,3,5,2, first almost every year
doubles 2,3,2,2,1,1,3,4,
hits 2.2.1.4.4.2.2.2.9
over 200 hits 7 times
He dominated in his time.
Absolutely agreed.
Boggs standing in the league
On base % 1983 to 91 2nd in 1984 ,first in all other years
Batting ave 1,3,1,1,1,1,1,1,3,5,2, first almost every year
doubles 2,3,2,2,1,1,3,4,
hits 2.2.1.4.4.2.2.2.9
over 200 hits 7 times
He dominated in his time.
I’m such an OBP whore, you know Boggs is going in.
**
Wade Boggs** - O. B. P. The king of his day, and all those doubles off the Monster don’t hurt, either. One of my favorite at-bats ever is one in which Boggs fouled off something like 15 pitches to eventually draw the walk. Awesome!
Mike Schmidt - Duh.
Chipper Jones - OPS+ 145 for career? Holy smoke. An average defender at best, but not a real liability. And I just love career OBPs over .400. Probably one of the most unassuming superstars in the game.
Eddie Mathews - OPS+ 143 for his career, and looks like an above average defender from his stats (though I have no way of really knowing…)
**
George Brett** - An offensive machine; not quite a Chipper, but played in a different era.
**
Ron Santo** - A very good all-around player.
Scott Rolen - A very good hitter, and the best defensive 3rd baseman I’ve seen in my lifetime. Kind of a sentimental pick, as I loved watching him play, but I do think he really deserves it.
**
Frank ‘Home Run’ Baker** - I feel like I need to vote for a few early players, and he seems to be a good choice. 135 OPS+ is pretty sexy, even though the raw numbers don’t seem that spectacular by today’s standards. He also seems to be an above average fielder for his time.
**
John McGraw** - The game was very different back then, but 135 OPS+ and .466 CAREER OBP (!) means he was probably one of the best.
Brooks Robinson - Rolen was often compared to Brooks, who seems to be the undisputed king of the hot corner, and his fielding stats back it up some. It kind of pains me to vote for a guy with career OBP at .322, but at least his OPS+ is above league average (104). I think the Hall should have spots for the absolute standouts in certain aspects of play, even if the other aspects are just mediocre.
I cannot believe the support for John McGraw as a player. In a 16 year career, he was healthy enough to have played over 100 games only 5 times. That is not an HOFer.
Like I said, that’s all pretty much the same skill. The man could hit singles and doubles. He could also walk. He was excellent at reaching base. That’s the most important skill in baseball, but he did it under ideal conditions–Fenway is a singles and doubles paradise-- and did nothing else particularly well.
You want to make him a Hall of Famer for that? Go ahead. It’s a free country. me, I’ll pass.