Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

All this HOF talk got me thinking

Should the HOF be standardized?


  • Total voters
    21

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

Fandruw25

Active member
Aug 25, 2008
3,238
0
Should the hall standardize what gets you in? Meaning use something like baseball references HOF monitor or set statistics. Take away the guessing game and just say if you get X stats you're in...you don't, you're not. All this talk about so and so shouldn't be there, or so and so should have been in, etc... has got me wondering.

Should they and why or why not?
 

Fandruw25

Active member
Aug 25, 2008
3,238
0
17ROCKIES12 said:
No. Jackie Robinson is the first example that comes to mind.

I think ***** leagues should be an exemption..I'm talking modern day.
 

Sly

Active member
Aug 7, 2008
2,874
0
Hell no.

Certain players bring certain things to the game. And once you look at "just stats", you take away from great defensive players like Ozzie Smith and Brooks Robinson.

Plus, those "set stats" may change based on the era. 500 HR's now is nothing compared to 500 HR's 20-years ago. 300 wins 50 years ago is nothing compared to 300 wins now based on pitchers pitching less games.

The process is fine, it's just garbage some of the reasoning that voters use (ie. won't vote for anyone on the first ballot).
 

mredsox89

New member
Aug 29, 2008
8,724
0
Miami/Boston
No. While standardizing would stop this voting mess, instead we would be arguing about the standards. Certain players just have that extra something that makes them HOF worthy.
 

jmc280zx

Member
Aug 11, 2008
940
0
SoCal
No its the hall of fame not the hall of statistics...

How well a player is/was liked plays a part in them getting in...
 

Sly

Active member
Aug 7, 2008
2,874
0
Let me also add...

How would it be fair to consider 500 HR's for a Shortstop or a 2nd Baseman, or even a Catcher.

Different stats would be needed for each position.

And mredsox89 is absolutely right...we'd all be bitching about the "standards".
 

uniquebaseballcards

New member
Nov 12, 2008
6,783
0
Would never cross my mind. If you were going to do that, you'd need to replace the umps with computers. Players would be playing for stats only. The game would be completely boring.
 

17ROCKIES12

Active member
Aug 13, 2008
4,208
0
Fandruw25 said:
17ROCKIES12 said:
No. Jackie Robinson is the first example that comes to mind.

I think ***** leagues should be an exemption..I'm talking modern day.

He was barely in the ***** Leagues. My point was that he did something great for the game (and belongs in the HOF) but didn't have amazing career numbers.


If you are only talking about from now on it doesn't make sense for similar reasons. If Ichiro retired today, his career totals wouldn't make him stand out as much as you look at his accomplishments.

Just looking at numbers would never be the right thing to do. Accomplishments, feats, and things career stats are all things that create "fame".
 

GTJ558

New member
Jan 26, 2009
152
0
Sly said:
Let me also add...

How would it be fair to consider 500 HR's for a Shortstop or a 2nd Baseman, or even a Catcher.

Different stats would be needed for each position.

And mredsox89 is absolutely right...we'd all be bitching about the "standards".

400 HRs for a Catcher and longevity is a big deal with this position certainly. Position difficulty means a lot in terms of stats....catchers get beat up, shortstops captain the infield, centerfielders are most often the best outfielders on their respective team...I have a friend who does not take this into account and we argue about it all the time...seems to me, the problem is the sportswriters who vote for it....players from the era should have a say in it.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top