HOF Snubs

I'm a big supporter of Curt Schilling. His numbers in the PEDs era are very strong. K's/BB ratio #2 all-time, over 3k K's, post season stud with 3 WS titles. Also played on some stinker Phillie teams. I believe he eventually does get in in the not-too-distant future.

MaineMule said:

I'm a big supporter of Curt Schilling. His numbers in the PEDs era are very strong. K's/BB ratio #2 all-time, over 3k K's, post season stud with 3 WS titles. Also played on some stinker Phillie teams. I believe he eventually does get in in the not-too-distant future.

Click to expand...

I'd agree he should get in too.

And Id put the PED guys in also. Bonds , Clemens , Rafey , McGwire , and I'd have to look over Sosa etc. And Piazza and Bagwell would get in w my vote. Mussina and Pettitte I'd take a look at as well and maybe a few others.

Baines was mentioned but I think he's right there.

Ryan

none of the above, at least as it concerns those that even the Veteran's Committee hasn't voted in. If they haven't gotten in by now, there's a reason.

Rose and Jackson belong, as do the steroid superstars.

@Lancemountain is correct - there are already guys in the Hall whose inclusion is debatable.

The current HOF roster is not up for debate. They got in for whatever reason at the time, so they ARE Hall of Famers. That being said, everyone seems to hold the standard of getting in to match the upper fraction of a fraction of a percent of players who are in, the Ruth, Johnson, Aaron, Cobb, Mays, Young type players.

I still say that at roughly 1.16% of the all-time roster (215/18,408), the HOF is still a bit too elite for my taste. I could probably compile a list of at least another 25 players who I believe deserve to be there without question, including some who are banned or are essentially banned.

Ultimately, until Rose in allowed in, the HOF has become a joke to me. You can't just pretend that your all time hit leader doesn't exist because of something he did as a manager later on, regardless of whether or not it was against the rules. He still rapped out 4000+ hits over an incredible career rivaled by an elite few. He was punished as a man for his betting indiscretions , but his playing legacy still exists. Maybe they wait until he is dead to let him pass, to continue to punish the man, but as in the case of Jackson, there is no indication that will happen.

Another area where the PC movement has made our society that much more ridiculous.

AllenGinterSigned said:

Only snubs in my book are "steroid guys" such as Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, and Rafeal Palmerio, I believe there are at least 100 guys in that do not belong!

Click to expand...

Pretty sure, although he may believe some of the list doesn't belong, he was questioning the statement that nearly half don't by AllenGinterSigned, which I also believe is ridiculous.

TNP777 said:

@Lancemountain is correct - there are already guys in the Hall whose inclusion is debatable.

Click to expand...

As a HOF Collector this topic is of interest to me.
I also agree Joe Jackson & Pete Rose deserve the call.
I cant believe no one has brought up Marvin Miller?
Another outcast of the MLB machine but ABSOLUTELY deserves to be in....

AMAZIN HOF COLLECTOR said:

As a HOF Collector this topic is of interest to me.
I also agree Joe Jackson & Pete Rose deserve the call.
I cant believe no one has brought up Marvin Miller?
Another outcast of the MLB machine but ABSOLUTELY deserves to be in....

Click to expand...

http://deadspin.com/how-america-******-baited-a-baseball-hero-499801964

mrmopar said:

The current HOF roster is not up for debate. They got in for whatever reason at the time, so they ARE Hall of Famers. That being said, everyone seems to hold the standard of getting in to match the upper fraction of a fraction of a percent of players who are in, the Ruth, Johnson, Aaron, Cobb, Mays, Young type players.

I still say that at roughly 1.16% of the all-time roster (215/18,408), the HOF is still a bit too elite for my taste. I could probably compile a list of at least another 25 players who I believe deserve to be there without question, including some who are banned or are essentially banned.

Ultimately, until Rose in allowed in, the HOF has become a joke to me. You can't just pretend that your all time hit leader doesn't exist because of something he did as a manager later on, regardless of whether or not it was against the rules. He still rapped out 4000+ hits over an incredible career rivaled by an elite few. He was punished as a man for his betting indiscretions , but his playing legacy still exists. Maybe they wait until he is dead to let him pass, to continue to punish the man, but as in the case of Jackson, there is no indication that will happen.

Another area where the PC movement has made our society that much more ridiculous.

Click to expand...

I was with you on the notion that the HOF does not need to be slimmed down but then you lost me on the Rose issue. Rose is represented in the HOF but induction is a privilege he did not earn. He knew the risk of his behavior and his choice was to do it anyway.

The Hall is what you did ON the field not off.
If we go by anything else....
Then a ok player who gives away all his money, gives back to his community, and does a ton of volunteer work should get in.

AMAZIN HOF COLLECTOR said:

The Hall is what you did ON the field not off.
If we go by anything else....
Then a ok player who gives away all his money, gives back to his community, and does a ton of volunteer work should get in.

Click to expand...

Is this comment about not inducting Rose? Rose's on the field accomplishments are recognized in the HOF.

The Dowd Report asserted that Pete Rose bet on fifty-two Reds games in 1987, at a minimum of $10,000 a day.
Rose, facing a very harsh punishment, along with his attorney and agent, Reuven Katz, decided to seek a compromise with Major League Baseball. On August 24, 1989, Rose agreed to a voluntary lifetime ban from baseball.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowd_Report

It is my understanding he bet on his team to win. If anything else can be confirmed I will change my stance.

AMAZIN HOF COLLECTOR said:

It is my understanding he bet on his team to win. If anything else can be confirmed I will change my stance.

Click to expand...

It matters for two reasons. First, when Rose did not bet on the Reds, his inaction was a signal to his bookies that he wasn’t very confident in that game. Those bookies may have used this inside information to place a bet against the Reds. This doesn’t mean the game was fixed, but is reflective of Rose’s state of mind. He was compromised. Second, his wager on certain games, but not others, may have influenced the way he made decisions as a manager.

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/08/why-pete-rose-still-cant-be-absolved/378866/

I too would like to see that list of 50-125 HOFers that do not belong...

mrmopar said:

Pretty sure, although he may believe some of the list doesn't belong, he was questioning the statement that nearly half don't by AllenGinterSigned, which I also believe is ridiculous.

Click to expand...

This is correct.