Baseball HOF

[albionmoonlight]

So the Pete Rose thing got me thinking. I know very little about baseball, but I enjoy reading the baseball discussions on here--it gives me a sense of how deep the game's history is.

So here's a barstool question. Out of all of the players in the Baseball HOF, who, in your opinion, does not belong there (for whatever reason--stats, overhyped, bad person, etc.).

I have heard a few times that Phil Rizzuto (sp?) does not deserve it at all--that his induction was more a product of NY hype and bias then his ability--but I don't know for sure at all--seeing as I know almost nothing about baseball.

Who else, IYO, does not belong there and why?

[Anrhydeddu]

Read Bill James' Politics of Glory: How Baseball's Hall of Fame Really Works (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0025107747/qid=1058538219/sr=1-8/ref=sr_1_8/104-9113522-0457551?v=glance&s=books)

He makes a great case the most of the players (cronies) that the Veteran's Committee voted in (esp. in the 1960s and 1970s) were quite undeserving. The main issue is that if you lower the bar or standards, then what would prevent comparable players from diluting the HOF even more? NFL is not exempt either, as the effort to enshrine all of the starters from the 1970s Steelers have shown.

[oykib]

Phil Rizzuto isn't close to the being the worst induction. There are guys in there that were position players and didn't hit as well as Deivi Cruz.

You can't even start to talk about Rizzuto, Tony Perez, or Bill Mazeroski before some of those guys are brought up.