Yes, sir.
So just because some bungfuck voter from 20-30 years ago decided to be an ass and make some sort of egotistical point, that gives you the right to do the same. Okay.
I dislike the “litmus” test requirement (a ridiculous vote means your priveledges are hereby revoked), but I believe in fairly evaluating whether a player belongs or not (and yes the subjective case counts too, hence why I would never vote for Dick Allen if given the opportunity), without recourse to meta- concerns or other such bullcrap.
I’d say “an obligation to do the same.”
One vote wont keep Henderson out. But a writer should be able to protest a bad attitude by with holding his vote. It is his right.
Why do people talk about the “Hall of Very Good”? “Fame” is a noun; “very good” is adjectival. “Hall of Note”, or some such, I recommend.
Then McGwire should be in. His numbers make it clear he belongs. He is rejected by perceived use of steroids.
That is just how it is in the real world.
I’m not horrified by Jim Rice’s election, not even surprised, just a bit disappointed. He’s not the worst player ever elected to the Hall of Fame by a long shot, but I can think of MANY guys more deserving.
I kept hearing that Rice was “the most feared” hitter in baseball in his prime. Nah, not really.
But you know who WAS feared in his prime? Frank Howard. If the voters had to pick a hard-slugging, one-dimensional left fielder, better Frank Howard than Jim Rice.
Well, and further than that, it’s a stupid argument to begin with. This player is very good, not great. I have yet to see that phrase employed in a useful way. Generally it means, yeah, well, I don’t care; fuck him.
There should be a Hall of We Don’t Care; Fuck Them for guys like Raines and Blyleven, and, like, Indian Bob Johnson.
Hall of Passing Acquaintance?
What bad attitude does he need to protest again? To my knowledge, Henderson never got in trouble with the law and never had a huge falling-out with a team or a manager. You’re saying a writer should withhold a vote because Henderson once asked for a raise?
People who vote based on stupid reasons like this - “he played for my hometown team,” “he wasn’t a nice guy” - should not have a vote for the Hall. It’s just idiotic.
Thank God they’re giving votes to Will Carroll, Kristina Kahrl and Rob Neyer instead of you, then. They seem to think that having the responsibility to determine who is a Hall of Famer involves such odd concepts like voting for Hall of Famers, not against them.
Rickey was a fun-loving flake, sure (his speech is going to be “interesting”) - but he played the game right. I don’t remember any teammate ever expressing anything but solid man-love for him.
Does Andre Dawson’s 68% mean he’s in next year or the year after? I hope so - it’s a shame AstroTurf destroyed his knees the way it destroyed Junior Griffey’s.
And why does Dale Murphy get no respect? He was as feared a hitter as Rice and Dawson, and got twice as many MVP’s as Rice did. But he’s stuck in the 20’s.
Yeah, it probably does. Nobody’s ever gotten that high a percentage without eventually getting in, and the classes over the next two years aren’t very strong. He’s also been steadily getting more votes over the last few years.
If the standard become as good as Jim Rice, the hall is going to get mighty crowded.
Rice was a fearsome hitter. He sure got you perked up when he came to the plate.
For me the hall is too easy to get into. I would elevate it a lot. Hall of Fame should mean something. One or 2 players should get in per decade. Steroids should not matter. They were everywhere. Hitters competed with pitchers and fielders who were using. It distorts when comparing to other eras, but during their era they played on a level field.
Did the Red Sox get extra runs from that fearsomeness? What is the difference between Jim Rice and say Albert Belle. He was pretty “fearsome” for a while too.
So which 3 or 4 would you pick from Maddux, Clemens, Pedro, Arod, Griffey, Piazza, Bonds, I Rodriguez, R Johnson, Rivera, Bagwell, Jeter etc.
ElvisL1ves:
Great as Dale Murphy was in his prime, that prime was shorter than Rice’s. Also, he probably suffers from how terrible Atlanta was during his days there - a division title in 1982, but usually the doormat of the NL West. Rice was part of a team that was always in the running.
That would be fun. Bonds is a sure thing. But I have trouble putting Rice in with Ruth,Cobb,and Williams. If Clemens gets a pass for being a lying prick, he would get in. Jeter,no. Pudge,no. Arod is not done . He seems to qualify.
The Hall should be an exalted place . To join Cy Young and Ruth, should be a privilege of the few. Debating whether a player is marginally qualified, would disqualify him from my hall.
Rose would be in.
I don’t think anyone would argue that that Hall isn’t exclusive enough - it seems that most have a problem with Rice being in. But if you’re going to argue for only 2-3 every decade, I’d really like to see you break down that entire list with an up or down vote. So far you have Bonds and Clemens, and possibly A-Rod. No Pedro? No Piazza? No Randy Johnson or Griffey Jr.? These are extremely talented people that have risen above their peers in nearly every way. In fact, many of them are better than Bonds/Clemens/A-Rod in various ways (though I’m not going to say they rise above them overall).
And Maddux, who is the biggest no brainer of the all for me.