MLB Off-Topic

[Majingir]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Even though I know to expect a worse team this year (first time in who knows how long, I'm expecting Jays to do worse than prior year), and Leafs/Raptors are both in playoff races, I'm still looking forward to Spring Training. Always get excited for it. Games don't mean anything, it's just watching baseball from Florida in diff ballparks with nice weather.

[Speedy]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I will never understand the BBWAA...at least they're forced to show their ballot now which proves how some of these guys need to go. You'd think the HOF would have already put out some of the morons already.

[BigOscar]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I'm pretty dubious of any voter who has one of Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens but not the other. I don't see how you possibly have only one of them, either you have neither or both as their careers are beyond doubt.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I'm pretty dubious of any voter who has one of Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens but not the other. I don't see how you possibly have only one of them, either you have neither or both as their careers are beyond doubt.

Because the voters don't have a strict guideline to follow. Some voters could've liked Bonds and hated Clemens and vice versa. It's no secret that part of the vote is personal. Maybe a voter asked for an autograph and was denied, and decided to carry that spite into their professional career.

But people like Murray Chass need to go. I'm a firm believer in having voting limits. Just like if a player has been on the ballot for 10 years, they get removed. Give a writer a vote for 10 years, then change.

[CMH]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

When it's an actual discussion that voters don't vote for guys because of personal vendettas, that should tell you the system is broken.

It's ridiculous we can have that conversation and it's treated like a normal thing. Imagine if everyone working for a company knew that the CEO was stealing money and it was just water cooler talk because, hey, it's part of the structure there.

The system is garbage. I don't like Curt Schilling and I don't think he should be a HoF lock, but he's got a point (even if his reasoning is misguided) when he talks about how the voting can be swayed.

I personally don't think "character" should be part of the vote. But that's just me. Obviously if the guy is a murderer or something then for sure keep him out, but because he's an ******* to reporters doesn't negate numbers.

[SPTO]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I'm pretty dubious of any voter who has one of Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens but not the other. I don't see how you possibly have only one of them, either you have neither or both as their careers are beyond doubt.

I think the defense of that kind of thinking is that Bonds was pretty much HOF material before he started taking PEDs. Clemens was pretty close to that level before coming to Toronto but his last couple years in Boston there was widespread talk of how he was declining.

I'm not saying it's right but I can at least understand that argument.

[BigOscar]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Because the voters don't have a strict guideline to follow. Some voters could've liked Bonds and hated Clemens and vice versa. It's no secret that part of the vote is personal. Maybe a voter asked for an autograph and was denied, and decided to carry that spite into their professional career.
.

That's pretty much my point, personal vendettas and not liking someone is the only reason I can see for picking one but not both, so any voter who does that should be hounded out.

It's one thing to subconsciously be bias against a marginal guy like Schilling because of his actions post career, you can't help that (but you should at least think about why you aren't picking him and make sure it's because of his actual career) but there is no way anyone should be voting who doesn't vote players in because they personally don't like them.

[SPTO]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Heard a great quote today:

"What's it all about? what's it all about? I'll tell you what it's all about kid. Booze, broads, baseball and BS" - Harry Caray

[TripleCrown9]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I think the defense of that kind of thinking is that Bonds was pretty much HOF material before he started taking PEDs. Clemens was pretty close to that level before coming to Toronto but his last couple years in Boston there was widespread talk of how he was declining.

I'm not saying it's right but I can at least understand that argument.

Well when a guy has the most Cy Youngs in baseball history, you gotta give him consideration.

He and Bonds would be no-brainers for me. But I don't get a vote.

And since I don't get a vote, here's my ballot.

Bonds
Clemens
Guererro
Hoffman
Martinez
Raines
Ramirez
Rodriguez
Schilling
Wakefield

[BigOscar]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

The HoF is tricky tbh as I think everyone has a different idea of what should be required for a player to get in there. I'm sure there are a lot of people in there who people think shouldn't be, whereas some other people will think a lot more players should be in there.

Personally I'd prefer it to be as selective as possible, with only the best of the best in there, rather than just very good players who amassed great careers through consistently being above average or very good, rather than genuinely being special, but I'm sure a lot of people view it differently

[redsox4evur]

MLB Off-Topic

I think the defense of that kind of thinking is that Bonds was pretty much HOF material before he started taking PEDs. Clemens was pretty close to that level before coming to Toronto but his last couple years in Boston there was widespread talk of how he was declining.



I'm not saying it's right but I can at least understand that argument.

That's exactly what the talk is when voting for just one of them. I think it was Heyman who brought it up the MLBN, who said he was one of the people who voted for Bonds but didn't for Clemens. And he went on to say something to this affect. The rumors I have heard with Bonds is that he started using steroids in 98/99 after Sosa and McGwire had the back and forth for the HR record. And like you said I would vote for Bonds because even if he didn't use steroids he would've been a HOFer. I mean look at his time in Pitt. He was on the track to becoming a HOFer, if not one already.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[Sportsforever]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

When it's an actual discussion that voters don't vote for guys because of personal vendettas, that should tell you the system is broken.

It's ridiculous we can have that conversation and it's treated like a normal thing. Imagine if everyone working for a company knew that the CEO was stealing money and it was just water cooler talk because, hey, it's part of the structure there.

The system is garbage. I don't like Curt Schilling and I don't think he should be a HoF lock, but he's got a point (even if his reasoning is misguided) when he talks about how the voting can be swayed.

I personally don't think "character" should be part of the vote. But that's just me. Obviously if the guy is a murderer or something then for sure keep him out, but because he's an ******* to reporters doesn't negate numbers.

Heck, I'd say let the murderer in! Look, what other HOF can you think of says "Oh, you weren't a very nice person so we aren't letting you in."? Think how ridiculous it would be if the Rock and Roll HOF said, "Man, you were the greatest band ever, but you really did too many drugs and groupies and were a poor role model. We can't let you in." That would be absurd. It's the BASEBALL HALL OF FAME...I don't care what you did outside the white lines, if you are one of the greatest INSIDE THE WHITE lines, period, you belong there.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

This is pretty cool. An exhibition game between the Rangers and Texas Longhorns. Nolan Ryan vs his son Reid. The title says '92, but the stats in-game say Spring '91.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4YzjHCDC_7w?list=PLkIJctRFgvrvioWixRkEaesZtipTrE70 S" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Money99]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I think the defense of that kind of thinking is that Bonds was pretty much HOF material before he started taking PEDs. Clemens was pretty close to that level before coming to Toronto but his last couple years in Boston there was widespread talk of how he was declining.

I'm not saying it's right but I can at least understand that argument.

That's how I see it too. I'm almost pychotic when it comes to my feelings on PED users and how they should be banned and have all their numbers stricken from the record books, let alone candidates for the HOF.

But in Bond's case, this guy was unbelievable before he started juicing.
His pre-PED seasons alone make him HOF worthy, IMO.

[areobee401]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

PED user and should be HOF'er Manny Ramirez has signed a contract to play independent baseball in Japan.