Posted By:
steve kWell, some interesting points made about Mazeroski. I watched him a lot in the 1960's and he always struck me as an average player. His lifetime batting average was 260. Despite his terrific defense, 260 should not get you in the Hall - that just simply isn't good enough. You may remember that a lot of players he played with couldn't believe he got in and I think some voting rules were changed after he was elected so that players such as him could not get in anymore. All that negative fuss sure tells you something. My deep feeling on getting into the Hall is to mention a player's name...and if there is much thought about whether he should be in or not, then he probably shouldn't be in. But you're right Jay - everyone has their opinions about who should be in the Hall and I certainly respect the opinions of people from this fine forum. But you are incorrect about the 1960 series HR - he was considered for the Hall because of the examples you gave but that HR put him over the top - he would have never gotten in if not hitting that HR - people loved it and remembered when he and the Pirates stuck it to the New York Yankees that year...which of course is not a bad thing - LOL.