- Jun 8, 2011
You going to disclose the context of this "discussion"?To be honest it never dawned on me that Jake Peavy would ever be in a discussion of HOF worthiness, but apparently that's not universally agreed on. I think the clear overwhelming odds are he doesn't see significant playing time (or any playing time) again, from my judgment if you look at it from a numbers standpoint he doesn't come close, and for the more old fashioned folks who judge someone's HOF worthiness by dominance during a particular time period he's even further from the conversation. I personally think literally dozens of pitchers from the 80s, and before, to the present deserve HOF recognition before Peavy is even mentioned. Look at Jack Morris' journey to finally breaking through and compare him on any level to Peavy...am I missing something?
Are you on something? Where did you get all that from what I said? When did I mention prospect collectors or HOF collectors or anything? When did I reference who’s worth what?No, I started this thread to discuss his view on Jake Peavy's HOF candidacy because I vehemently disagreed with him. Who cares what who collects...? Are you suggesting prospect collectors are somehow inferior to HOF collectors? It's a hobby...you collect what makes you happy and who gives a **** what other people think about it. I don't agree that Jake Peavy is a HOFer, or anywhere in that category, and that's that.
FYI there are also plenty of players not in the HOF who are worth substantially more than ones who are...so nothing you said seemed to be thought out.