Who gets into the HOF in 2016

matthew.runyon.9 said:

I'm ok with Hoffman getting in, but I don't think they'll elect him in his first year of eligibility

Click to expand...

This whole "...but not on the first ballot" stuff is bogus. I am a Padre homer and have a hunch the "informed voters" might hold off until Riviera gets in.

Riviera is certainly HOF worthy as is Trevor.

It's just a museum people. No one is confusing Phil Rizzuto with Honus Wagner. The, "it's not the Hall of Very Good" argument is silly. Because it's also not the Hall of Only The 10 Greatest Ever. If you're going to use silly semantics then go by the word fame. Lots of people have fame. Like the Kardashians.


Just a museum.....and guys are worth remembering, mentioning, honoring for many reasons


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Andy, you are my hero of the week.

Brewer Andy said:

It's just a museum people. No one is confusing Phil Rizzuto with Honus Wagner. The, "it's not the Hall of Very Good" argument is silly. Because it's also not the Hall of Only The 10 Greatest Ever. If you're going to use silly semantics then go by the word fame. Lots of people have fame. Like the Kardashians.


Just a museum.....and guys are worth remembering, mentioning, honoring for many reasons


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Very well said. People will never agree on anything and it's not surprising they don't agree on who should be in the Hall of Fame. Just look at the number of votes some of the people who you would think clearly don't belong in the Hall of Fame get. I think Tim Raines measures up well compared to some of the other players already in the Hall of Fame but he is what some would say a border guy as Dawson was for so many years, but once you are in you are. It doesn't matter how long it took or what percentage of the vote that you received. Besides, it's not like this is the Football Hall of Fame that seems to let everyone in.

Yeah I'm not saying there shouldn't be "a" standard or a line in the sand. But the Hall is already much too diluted for the "elite of the elite" crowd and they're never taking anyone out. No reason to get too worked up over it. Discussion is always fun though!

I assume it will be next year that MLB.com writers will have their first chance to vote? It will be interesting to see how the habits of voters change over the next 5-10 years with changing media, coverage, sabremetrics, etc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Different personnel, same state of mind IMO...

Frank Thomas was only an All-Star 5 times, and I don't hear many people arguing his enshrinement, even with half of a career at DH.

What was that Nirvana comparison about?

BunchOBull said:

Frank Thomas was only an All-Star 5 times, and I don't hear many people arguing his enshrinement, even with half of a career at DH.

Click to expand...

2-time MVP? 500 home runs? Plus he was loved, feared, respected, etc... for most of his career. Not sure if your comment was directed at me, but AS is just one measure, not the most important, but one measure about how someone stacks up with peers, and to go with [MENTION=2212]Brewer Andy[/MENTION]' s comment about "Fame" AS can show how "famous" a guy is. Raines spent 3/4 of his career as a platoon player, not very "famous" at all.

One thing I agree with is..."he is a hall of famer, but not a first ballet hall of famer" To me that is a complete joke. Either you are a hall of famer or your not. 1 ballet, your either in or out. Most people say Hoffman deserves to be in just not on the first ballet. Well if he deserves to be in then put him in on the first ballet. Makes no sense

Brewer Andy said:

It's just a museum people. No one is confusing Phil Rizzuto with Honus Wagner. The, "it's not the Hall of Very Good" argument is silly. Because it's also not the Hall of Only The 10 Greatest Ever. If you're going to use silly semantics then go by the word fame. Lots of people have fame. Like the Kardashians.


Just a museum.....and guys are worth remembering, mentioning, honoring for many reasons


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Thank you.

Gwynn545 said:

2-time MVP? 500 home runs? Plus he was loved, feared, respected, etc... for most of his career. Not sure if your comment was directed at me, but AS is just one measure, not the most important, but one measure about how someone stacks up with peers, and to go with [MENTION=2212]Brewer Andy[/MENTION]' s comment about "Fame" AS can show how "famous" a guy is. Raines spent 3/4 of his career as a platoon player, not very "famous" at all.

Click to expand...

I was just making a general comment about All-Star appearances and their limited value as a HOF-worthiness standard because it was brought up in several posts here and elsewhere this week.

Oddly enough, Frank wasn't an All-Star in years he was top 5 in MVP voting on several occasions.

Gwynn545 said:

Griffey, Piazza (Griffey should be highest % ever)
I can live with Hoffman and Bagwell like I can live with Rice, Sutter, Perez
I do not think Raines belongs, and think it's a joke he's constantly supported as such
Bonds and Clemens should be in, as should Rose
The Veterans Committee is not my favorite, as I think they vote too many in.

Click to expand...

they vote too many in because its a business, its not about being worthy.

I heard someone mention that since Ruth wasn't a unanimously voted HOFer, nobody will ever be. I disagree. Although Ruth was [maybe] the greatest, most beloved player of all time, you have to remember who votes for the Hall of Fame: Sports writers. Sports writers are human beings. As unbiased as we'd hope they'd be in electing a Hall of Fame class, unfortunately that isn't true. Many things can keep someone from getting votes:

1. Playing for a team that people dislike for whatever reason. There's a large enough group of people that hate the Yankees, Red Sox, and other larger market teams. It'd be stupid to assume no sports writers let their disdain for a team affect their voting. I believe this is what prevented guys like Ruth, Gehrig, and Williams from being voted in unanimously.

2. Having a PED, drug, or ethical cloud over your name. While I don't agree steroid use should keep you out of the hall, enough voters do. Also, a lot of voters won't vote for you if they believe you're a ****ty person.

3. Racism. Although it isn't as prevalent today with voting, I strongly believe guys like Aaron and Mays would have received more votes if they were white.

4. Assuming someone will get inducted regardless of "my" vote. "If Randy Johnson is going to be inducted whether I vote for him or not, why waste my vote? Maybe my vote for Tim Raines can keep his hopes alive. I'll vote for him instead."


I actually believe Griffey has the best chance of anyone in recent memory to get voted in unanimously. Elite numbers, no black clouds, played for a team nobody really gave a **** about.

MrMet said:

So surprising you'd say that hope alls been well

Better be Piazza

Click to expand...

Been saying it for a few years.

and things are good. Hit me up if you are ready for more words.

moxacaine said:

they vote too many in because its a business, its not about being worthy.

Click to expand...

Agreed. (...but at least it's not as bad as the NBA Hall of Fame.)

Here is a link to nine HOF players who may not be HOF worthy

(Yes, Scooter Rizzuto and Bill Mazeroski are on the list.)

Gwynn545 said:

Raines spent 3/4 of his career as a platoon player, not very "famous" at all.

Click to expand...

No, he did not. He is among the top 30 most valuable OF'ers to ever play the game, that has to be worth something.

moxacaine said:

they vote too many in because its a business, its not about being worthy.

Click to expand...

There have been over 20,000 players in the history of MLB. Do you really think 215 former MLB players is too many?

Tim Raines reached base more times than Tony Gwynn. Just sayin'


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Brewer Andy said:

It's just a museum people. No one is confusing Phil Rizzuto with Honus Wagner. The, "it's not the Hall of Very Good" argument is silly. Because it's also not the Hall of Only The 10 Greatest Ever. If you're going to use silly semantics then go by the word fame. Lots of people have fame. Like the Kardashians.


Just a museum.....and guys are worth remembering, mentioning, honoring for many reasons


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Agreed. It's not like the Hall of Fame is in some warehouse that can't be expanded. It will be around for the history of baseball.

Lancemountain said:

What was that Nirvana comparison about?

Click to expand...

The argument that Kurt Cobain used heroine (and it arguably gave his music depth and value) and is still in the Rock and Roll HoF, should be applied to guys like Sosa and McGwire. They used a nefarious substance to make their game better. It's interesting. The Rock and Roll HoF literally has criminals in it, while guys like Sosa and McGwire didn't actually break any laws (or rules, technically; at least not as they were at the time). Yet the BBWAA wants to have some moral objectivity about cheating.

I say anyone who covered baseball during that time and didn't bat an eye at these guys becoming monsters, should have their current HoF vote revoked.