2016 Hall of Fame

[bukie]

I can see an argument for voting for neither Bonds nor Clemens (I don't agree with it).

 

I can see an argument for voting for both Bonds and Clemens.

 

There is no argument for voting for one and not the other.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I can see an argument for voting for neither Bonds nor Clemens (I don't agree with it).

 

I can see an argument for voting for both Bonds and Clemens.

 

There is no argument for voting for one and not the other.

Yup

[mul21]

Junior with most ever, 99.3%. 437 out of 440. Those 3 wankers need to be put up against a wall.

 

Not if those 3 all filled their ballot (all 10 votes used) with other reasonable choices.

[TruffleShuffle]

they don't let in players like bonds and clemens, but griffey gets more than 99% despite being an obvious steroid user?!?

 

http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/simpsons/images/b/be/HatB_-_Ken_Griffey_Jr

[UMFan83]

How is it possible that 2 voters could seem David Eckstein as worthy of the HOF?

[Guest]

How is it possible that 2 voters could seem David Eckstein as worthy of the HOF?

Imagine, if he could have hit only 358 more HR and won 8 more gold gloves, he might have received 11 votes...

[Tracer Bullet]

By the way Mike Trout is halfway to Griffey's career fWAR

 

if he starts wearing his hat backwards despite the cries that he's disrespecting the game, i might start caring

[SouthSideRyan]

1. Junior
   
2. Piazza
   
3. Raines
   
4. Bagwell
   
5. Bonds
   
6. Clemens
   
7. Edgar Martinez
   
8. Mussina
   
9. Trammell
   
10. Wagner
    
11. Sheffield
    
12. McGwire
    
13. Sosa

 

I want 13 on my 10 person ballot.

 

Mine would be your top 5, plus 7 and 8.

 

What in the world?

 

Not enough getting in? I honestly wouldn't put Sammy or McGwire in(I'm not a Sammy hater either). I'd leave Clemens off and put Bonds in before him, strictly because I think Bonds was a surefire HOFer w/o roids, while I doubt Clemens was. I'd put Clemens in eventually though.(and yes, I fully admit it's pretty dumb to not just put guys in immediately, if I'm eventually going to cave on them.)

 

I think Edgar is supremely underrated and have no problem putting him in and I'd have no issue with Mussina, with his entire body of work coming from the AL East.

 

Would you have put them all in?(on Tim's list)

 

My what in the world was for no Clemens. I'd strike Wagner from his list, and I'm 50-50 on Edgar, Walker, and Kent.

 

ETA: Oh and Schilling should be in too. I think Tim let his personality get in the way.

[SouthSideRyan]

How is it possible that 2 voters could seem David Eckstein as worthy of the HOF?

 

I was fine with throwaway votes on years where you couldn't fill the ballot. The past few years it's just taking away from somebody who needs the support.

[jersey cubs fan]

How is it possible that 2 voters could seem David Eckstein as worthy of the HOF?

 

I was fine with throwaway votes on years where you couldn't fill the ballot. The past few years it's just taking away from somebody who needs the support.

its' not like those votes would have gone to somebody worthwhile.

[NonProfitCow]

Just make it a Yes/No ballot with no limits and all ballots public for public shaming and mockery.

[mul21]

Just make it a Yes/No ballot with no limits and all ballots public for public shaming and mockery.

 

I endorse this method. Shame the a-holes who fill out idiotic ballots into at least having to defend their stupid choices.

[jersey cubs fan]

Just make it a Yes/No ballot with no limits and all ballots public for public shaming and mockery.

 

I endorse this method. Shame the a-holes who fill out idiotic ballots into at least having to defend their stupid choices.

I feel like a lot of these guys are more than happy to defense their stupid choices and feel no shame in making stupid decisions. That's like sports columnist 101 right there.

[Banedon]

Just make it a Yes/No ballot with no limits and all ballots public for public shaming and mockery.

 

I endorse this method. Shame the a-holes who fill out idiotic ballots into at least having to defend their stupid choices.

I feel like a lot of these guys are more than happy to defense their stupid choices and feel no shame in making stupid decisions. That's like sports columnist 101 right there.

 

Or Trump 101.

[Cubswin11]

Just make it a Yes/No ballot with no limits and all ballots public for public shaming and mockery.

I like this idea. My fix is (I know it absolutely would never happen) there's still the voting aspect for those who fall short of the objective/measurable criteria but a player automatically gets in if they reach any of the following criteria;

 

- 1 season of 10 WAR or more

- in your 5 best years you averaged 7 WAR or more (ball park guess on years/WAR average)

- if you exceed a certain total WAR for you career (probably around 70ish).

 

Those are the rough parameters at least of what I'd propose or like to see. At the end of the day though I really couldn't care less about the HOF and who gets in/doesn't and the yearly outrage over who votes for who or what criteria they use.

[chopsx9]

Just make it a Yes/No ballot with no limits and all ballots public for public shaming and mockery.

I like this idea. My fix is (I know it absolutely would never happen) there's still the voting aspect for those who fall short of the objective/measurable criteria but a player automatically gets in if they reach any of the following criteria;

 

- 1 season of 10 WAR or more

- in your 5 best years you averaged 7 WAR or more (ball park guess on years/WAR average)

- if you exceed a certain total WAR for you career (probably around 70ish).

 

Those are the rough parameters at least of what I'd propose or like to see. At the end of the day though I really couldn't care less about the HOF and who gets in/doesn't and the yearly outrage over who votes for who or what criteria they use.

 

What happens when they revise the way WAR is calculated and players drop in and out of those parameters?

[Guest]

I think I've said this before, but if it were up to me I would reorganize the HOF into era's of roughly 15 years and guys would go into that wing of the HOF. For a guy whose career maybe spanned two eras, he would go in the era in which he peaked.

 

The HOF is a museum for the history of the game and I don't really think it's necessary to compare guys from different eras. I think guys should be compared to their peers. It would make the HOF larger, but who gives a [expletive]? If you were the best guy at your position for 5 years and among the best for another 4, you belong in the HOF.

 

Clemens, Bonds, Sammy, McGuire all belong in the HOF, but so does the story of the "steroid era". Excluding them seems to me like they are trying to forget the era existed.

 

Flame on!

[Sammy Sofa]

I think I've said this before, but if it were up to me I would reorganize the HOF into era's of roughly 15 years and guys would go into that wing of the HOF. For a guy whose career maybe spanned two eras, he would go in the era in which he peaked.

 

The HOF is a museum for the history of the game and I don't really think it's necessary to compare guys from different eras. I think guys should be compared to their peers. It would make the HOF larger, but who gives a [expletive]? If you were the best guy at your position for 5 years and among the best for another 4, you belong in the HOF.

 

Clemens, Bonds, Sammy, McGuire all belong in the HOF, but so does the story of the "steroid era". Excluding them seems to me like they are trying to forget the era existed.

 

Flame on!

 

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/glee/images/e/e2/Office-karen-shrug.gif/revision/latest?cb=20150106110113

[JennieGarthAlgar]

 

Clemens, Bonds, Sammy, McGuire all belong in the HOF, but so does the story of the "steroid era". Excluding them seems to me like they are trying to forget the era existed.

 

You think?

[NonProfitCow]

I think I've said this before, but if it were up to me I would reorganize the HOF into era's of roughly 15 years and guys would go into that wing of the HOF. For a guy whose career maybe spanned two eras, he would go in the era in which he peaked.

 

The HOF is a museum for the history of the game and I don't really think it's necessary to compare guys from different eras. I think guys should be compared to their peers. It would make the HOF larger, but who gives a [expletive]? If you were the best guy at your position for 5 years and among the best for another 4, you belong in the HOF.

 

Clemens, Bonds, Sammy, McGuire all belong in the HOF, but so does the story of the "steroid era". Excluding them seems to me like they are trying to forget the era existed.

 

Flame on!

You forgot Ripken, Alomar, Pedro, Smoltz, Glavine, Johnson, Thomas, Griffey, Piazza, Gwyn, Boggs (and others I'm surely forgetting) also played and in many cases peaked in the "steroid era."

 

I think they should just change every plaque before 2010 to say that they were never tested, so we don't know if they were clean or not.

[Careless]

Junior with most ever, 99.3%. 437 out of 440. Those 3 wankers need to be put up against a wall.

 

Not if those 3 all filled their ballot (all 10 votes used) with other reasonable choices.

If one of them is reasonable, both are must-admits. They're the two best players on the list.

 

edit: was amused to see the other day that Junior had 0.0 fWAR over his last seven seasons. I'd say it's a shame he didn't age better if he hadn't been in the division.

[weis21]

Junior with most ever, 99.3%. 437 out of 440. Those 3 wankers need to be put up against a wall.

 

Not if those 3 all filled their ballot (all 10 votes used) with other reasonable choices.

If one of them is reasonable, both are must-admits. They're the two best players on the list.

 

edit: was amused to see the other day that Junior had 0.0 fWAR over his last seven seasons. I'd say it's a shame he didn't age better if he hadn't been in the division.

was listening to sports radio the other night while driving and they (can't remember who - fox sports?) were interviewing bob costas. and he defended the three voters who left off KGJ by saying they could have been doing it "for someone that needed help...like Jim Edmonds".

[OleMissCub]

Griffey should have a backwards cap.

[biittner77]

I think I've said this before, but if it were up to me I would reorganize the HOF into era's of roughly 15 years and guys would go into that wing of the HOF. For a guy whose career maybe spanned two eras, he would go in the era in which he peaked.

 

The HOF is a museum for the history of the game and I don't really think it's necessary to compare guys from different eras. I think guys should be compared to their peers. It would make the HOF larger, but who gives a [expletive]? If you were the best guy at your position for 5 years and among the best for another 4, you belong in the HOF.

 

Clemens, Bonds, Sammy, McGuire all belong in the HOF, but so does the story of the "steroid era". Excluding them seems to me like they are trying to forget the era existed.

 

Flame on!

 

I've never been but I've heard that the actual HOF building is surprisingly small considering everything that could/ should be in it. They should have a separate floor with an area for each team so they could go see the fan favorites that belong in the so called "hall of very good".

[bhogg]

Yea, I was shocked how cramped and small the HoF is. Granted, it was induction weekend 2005 when I was there, but it's still really small. There's no excuse why it shouldn't be so much bigger. Love the idea of having large sections for each team. . . . mini halls of fame within the hall of fame. Brilliant!!