The percentage of all players elected should never be a constant except within specific eras.
A vast majority of the total number of MLB players have been active since WWII and we don't need to have the same percentage of players elected now as they did before all the expansions.
IMO, while the talent pool is much larger, expansion has assured that the mean-level talent is actually lower than before.
That's my three(?) cents worth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ejharrington
I think the issue is not that there are too many players in the HOF. There are only 228 players in the HOF (excludes Negro Leaguers, Managers, Umpires, and Executives / Pioneers), which is like 1.1% of all the players who ever made the Major Leagues. The issue is not even that there have been some bad selections, which have often been at least partially the result of cronyism. The issue is that it seems the HOF has not corrected the mistakes of the past that resulted in many of these poor selections. Clearly, some of the voters on the committee that voted for Baines should have abstained from voting as they could not possibly claim to be impartial.
For the record, these are the 12 picks out of 228 I think clearly were bad selections:
Ray Schalk - C
Rick Farrell - C
High Pockets Kelly 1B
Jim Bottomley 1B
Freddie Lindstrom 3B
Chick Hafey LF
Lloyd Waner CF
Tommy McCarthy RF
Ross Youngs RF
Harold Baines DH
Jesse Haines P
Rube Marquard P
These are the players (excluding players still-eligible and PED and banned players) I believe should be selected based on statistics, championships, clutch performance, fame, popularity, and other intangibles, such as who were considered true superstars when they were playing:
Thurman Munson - C
Keith Hernandez 1B
Don Mattingly 1B
Gil Hodges 1B
Steve Garvey 1B
Lou Whitaker 2B
Ross Barnes 2B
Ken Boyer 3B
Minnie Minoso LF
Dale Murphy CF
Roger Maris RF
Rusty Staub - RF
Tommy Bond P
I also believe the HOF made a mistake not inducting Buck ONeill in and should correct it.
|