HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Denny</b><p>Has Any Body even Mention'd "Big" Ed Walsh? He has the lowest era of any pitcher ever. He's the only guy ever to pitch & win(complete games at that) a double header...Twice! I'm a "Big Six" fan Along with "Big Ed"....Matty won the 1905 World series(3-0) almost by himself! I do agree with Barry's opinion about Seaver. I grew up in Astoria & moved to Long Island, Tom was definately a force to be recond with....<br /><br />Denny Walsh

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Ricky Y</b><p>No qwalms with Gwynn and Ripken...I wished Goose Gossage had gotten in this time. <br /><br />Ricky

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Tony Gwynn was quoted in the paper today saying: "We all knew. All you all knew. We knew. Players knew. Owners knew. Everybody knew. And we didn't say anything about it."<br /><br />That's a pretty strong statement from someone as easygoing as Tony. I guess because the home run made so much money for major league baseball, everybody went blind until it could no longer stay hidden.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Tony Andrea</b><p>The way I see it is this. If your going to keep one out from the steroid era such as Mcgwire, I dont have a problem with it, but you'd better keep them all out if your going to do that.<br />Otherwise your simply picking and choosing only certain players out of a large group and thats not right. If Mac doesnt get in, neither should Bonds, Palmerio, Sosa, Sheffield, and even some of the marque pitchers some others have mentioned. <br />Personally I think he deserves to be in since Bonds will get in. You simply cannot say yes to that guy and no to this guy. Doesnt matter what happened in congress that day. What matters is what happened on the field throughout his career. <p> Tony

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>"I would rate Pedro, Koufax, Bob Gibson, and maybe Spahn as being superior to Tom Terrific (anyone else remember Tom Terrific?)."<br /><br />Some good choices there but for the sake of discussion and good ol' fashioned fun, I will defend my pick.<br /><br />Koufax's career was too short - the guy didn't even win 200 games. He's Dwight Gooden's career, the other way. He also benefitted from a no offense era and Dodger stadium. He was great - don't get me wrong but Tom's endurance and stability smashes Koufax.<br /><br />Gibson was great too - probably more dominating for a shorter time, but again - he didn't win 300 games. There's a reason for that...and the Cards had some great teams so it wasn't lack of offense.<br /><br />Pedro was as dominating a pitcher as I have ever seen. How can anybody forget his 6 inning no-hit performance against the Indians while he was injured. But a bit too brittle for me to put him up as one of the 5 greatest ever.<br /><br />Spahn had all the numbers - 363 wins - a 118 RelERA and is a good choice here. I can't argue much against that but Tom's RelERA was still better.<br /><br />These guys may have all been better pitchers at some point in their careers than Spahn ever was, but for sure dominance and longetivity, I still go with Seaver.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>whycough</b><p> I'm glad you took up the cudgel in this little debate on the rating of moundsmen we have actually seen with our own eyes. First, let me explain one thing. I believe that longevity is overrated when looking at the relative greatness of baseball players. I'm more of a talent guy. If Player A is a superior player for 10 years to Player B, but then leaves the game (for what ever reason); and then Player B continues his excellence at his slightly lesser level than Player A for, say, 5 more years, then I still consider Player A a better player. I also like to judge players when they are healthy. When Koufax and Pedro were healthy and at their peaks, they had more talent and were better than any other pitchers I have seen (batters had no shot!). I also like to greatly consider the evidence of my own eyes rather than being just a stat guy. Both these criterion (longevity overrated and the evidence of my own eyes) have led me to conclude that, among other conclusions that<br /> 1. Pedro and Koufax were the best pitchers I've ever seen. By far.<br /> 2. Clemente was better than Aaron.<br /> 3. Mantle and DiMaggio I would rate #5 and #6 of all time (both retired at 36)<br /> 4. Ted Williams is the second greatest player of all time (take away his war years lost, put him in Yankee Stadium or Tiger Stadium).<br /> 5. Joe Wood belongs in the Hall. <br /><br />I must confess, however, that I never saw Joe D or Smokey Joe with my own eyes. But I do read a great deal. Old films help also.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Joe DiMaggio didn't get enough votes the first year he was eligible. Hard to believe.<br />A case can be made why McGwire doesn't belong in the Hall even if he never took steroids. He hit .263 and had no MVPs to his name, not even finishing close. He was a below average fielder. He never won a Golden Glove except one year when all the first basemen seem to have injuries the same year (Mattingly was out for most of the year). He stole only a handful bases in his career. If you compare him to Harmon Killebrew who took several tries to get in, the Killer was MVP in '65 and finished either 2nd or 3rd in the MVP voting several times.<br />I would compare McGwire to Dale Murphy in terms of eligibility and Murph had back to back MVP years.<br />McGwire doesn't deserve to get in even if he were clean which I am convinced he wasn't.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>No HOF for Big Mac, special sauce or not<br />He put on quite a show in 98, but hey, 1 year ain't enough

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Bob, of course, you're right. Unfortunately, once a player reaches that 500 HR magical plateau all common sense flies out the window. Look at Fred McGriff. I think he retired a few HRs short of 500 and will barely be an afterthought when he is eligible. Had he hit a few more HRs...different story -- he probably becomes Wade Boggs to some extent in terms of Hall-worthy stats. All that being said, tons of players cheated in the dead ball era so I'm not sure (though I wish) we can keep players out forever due to their cheating. Tell me this, however: watching McGwire even being considered for the Hall--doesn't it piss you off that Rose cannot even get on the ballot?

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Bob, Jason<br /><br />You've brought up legitimate arguments why McGwire should not be elected the first time. However, once this steroid controversy blows over, he will be elected.<br /><br />With regard to pitchers like Koufax, Pedro, and Smokey Joe Woods, they are among the best but I would say that longevity is an absolute must. The Hall of Fame gives ballplayers a break when they make a player eligible after 10 years. For the superstars, we are talking about a 15-20 year minimum.<br /><br />You guys have forgotten Walter Johnson and Lefty Grove. Their skills and longevity are legendary.<br /><br />Peter

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>LetsGoBucs</b><p>"Clemente was better than Aaron"<br /><br />You get a gold star for the day!!!

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Guys,<br /><br />Clemente was a better fielder than Aaron, but you can't believe that he was also a better hitter can you. And since hitting is more important than fielding, Aaron was a better overall player.<br /><br />Clemente has a legendary arm but that's not enough.<br /><br />Peter

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>I know this has already been said but...<br /><br />Anyone that didn't first ballot Ripken or Gwynn apparently doesn't know baseball or appreciate it enough give these players their due. Who cares about the past. I say remove the privalege of voting from those idiots. <br /><br />These two players were actually GOOD GUYS in baseball. What kind of writer could deny either of these two a vote? Ripken received more votes than Gwynn. How can that be? There must be some cloud of stupidity that blankets the minds of the voters that voted for Ripken but not Gwynn. That little fat guy could just plain HIT (eight batting titles says so...)

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Guys,<br /><br />Getting in on the first round is by far the toughest and there are writers that want to maintain that tradition. Joe Dimaggio didn't get in until about the 3rd round.<br /><br />I say that our vintage forum should get a vote on the next HOF ballot. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Peter

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>I beleive several voters don't vote for players in their first year no matter who is on the ballot.<br />I think too much is made of which year and what percentage, especially as players are voted in comparison<br />to who else is on the ballot. Ripken and Gwynn weren't on the ballot last year, perhaps making it easier<br />for Sutter. Tom Seaver was a fine pitcher, one of the best of all time, but obviously wasn't the best<br />best ball player in the history of the game. Ripken isn't the third best player ever. The HOF ballot<br />percetnages aren't a direct reflection to a player's greatness. Jimmie Foxx got 10 votes in his first <br />year and didn't get voted in until the seventh year. Many or most would rank Foxx above Rikpen and Gwynn<br />in greatness.<br /><br />Whether it's the first or 15th year, if you're voted into the Hall of Fame you're a Hall of Famer. When <br />visiting the museum, Eddie Mathews and Joe DiMaggio were allowed to use the same bathroom as the first <br />year guys. Mike Schmidt was never heard to say, "Hey, who let DiMaggio in here. There's a Honey Bucket<br />in the parking lot you guys."

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>DMcD</b><p>"I say that our vintage forum should get a vote on the next HOF ballot."<br />As if. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>never said that? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />He has been rather outspoken about who should be in or out in the past... (Santo, Rose, etc)<br /><br />

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>howard</b><p>Clemente was a better fielder than Aaron but Aaron was still an outstanding defensive player. He was also a much better hitter than clemente and a better base runner.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>whycough</b><p> The Great Roberto was worth the price of admission all by himself. He had the BEST outfield arm I've ever seen. He was a Jackie Robinson-type baserunner. The only better fielder I've seen is Willie Mays. Ask Wayne Varner. As Joe D once told a friend about the wonder of making love with MM, "You should'a been there."

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>You know, if you went strictly by the numbers, you could make a case that Aaron was the greatest player of all time. Not saying he is, just that you could have a solid argument in his behalf.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Joe D. made love to Mickey Mantle- I thought they hated each other <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>whycough</b><p> Very droll, Barry!

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I guess I picked the wrong MM!

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>howard</b><p>I agree that Clem had one of the all-time great arms but a "Jackie Robinson type base runner"? If you mean that they both ran by putting one foot ahead of the other then I agree. Clem had some speed and was a smart base runner but Robinson has been widely acknowledged as one of the all-time great base runners. He was a guy who could get into a pitchers head just by being on base. A better comparison between the two would be their courage and their commitment to social causes.<br /><br />P.S. - despite Clemente's deservedly lionized heroics in the '71 series Aaron's post season numbers are much better than his.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Jeff- I agree 100%. As long as Speaker and Cobb are in (as well as others who bet and tried to influence games) Rose deserves to be in the Hall as a player.<br />That's a different kettle of fish from this thread, though, so no more.<br />On Clemente, I saw both he and Aaron play. Clemente was a great player but Aaron, in the words of many of the best pitchers of that era, was the one guy they didn't want to come to the plate with men on base. I think Aaron has never gotten the recognition he was due, other than being labeled the all-time HR king.<br />On Aaron as the best of all time? In a word, no. Babe Ruth was the greatest player who ever put on a uniform. Maybe it is close between Babe and Willie and Ted and Roberto and Hank, but then you have to consider the fact Ruth was the best left handed pitcher in baseball while he was on the mound. It would be like trying to decide who was the greatest football player of all time and finding out not only was Jim Brown one of the greatest running backs, but he was also the greatest middle linebacker who ever lived.<br />Just my 2 cents.<br />tbob

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Howard- while I agree Clemente had one of the greatest World Series ever, it was the 1971 Series.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Bob- my argument for Aaron was strictly by the numbers: 1st in home runs, RBI's, total bases, and extra base hits; 3rd in hits and runs (I think). Those are monster stats in all the most important categories. Of course, there are others who were as good or better, but those numbers don't lie.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>howard</b><p>Thanks Barry. I think '72 was Gene Tenace's year.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Barry,<br /><br />I agree with you and that's why Hank was better than Roberto Clemente.<br /><br />Bill James did an analysis of the value of Clemente's fabled right arm and came to the conclusion that it didn't really contribute to winning that many ball games.<br /><br />Peter

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Clemente was my favorite player when I was growing up but Aaron had a better career. And I think he may be 4th in runs scored, behind Henderson, Cobb, and Rose. I'm doing this from memory, so can someone confirm that number?

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Mark Burke</b><p>Aaron was tied for 3rd (with Ruth). Clemente was 76th.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Here's a look at the players coming in as 1st year players in the next 3 years:<br />2008 first-timers<br />Shawon Dunston, Travis Fryman, David Justice, Mike Morgan, Tim Raines, Randy Velarde. <br />2009 first timers<br />Mark Grace, Rickey Henderson, Dean Palmer, Dan Plesac, Matt Williams. <br />2010 first-timers<br />Andres Galarraga, Edgar Martinez, Robin Ventura <br /><br />Tim Raines may get in in 2008 but as a first ballot HOFer? Next year is the time for Gossage, Rice and Dawson. <br />Ricky is a lock for 2009 and Raines if he is snubbed in 2008 but no one else, maybe Blyleven gets in finally. <br />2010? No one, so Bert may get in at last.<br />The veterans committee should finally vote for Oliva, Kaat and Santo in the next couple of years.<br />

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I was way off. Isn't Henderson 1st?

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>I agree with Bob. Is Raines first ballot material? No way in my mind. Was Gossage a more dominant player in his era? In my opinion, yes. Next year I think Gossage goes in with Rice and maybe Dawson. How can the HOF leave out guys that have been all-stars for 8 or 9 years? That clearly establishes dominance in an era which is enough for me.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Did you know that Tim Raines used to slide into second base on a slight angle when he was stealing because he would keep a vial of cocaine in his uniform pants pocket? Now that's HOF material.

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>Mark Burke</b><p>Barry....yes, Henderson was first, Cobb was 2nd.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.baseball-almanac.com/hitting/hiruns3.shtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.baseball-almanac.com/hitting/hiruns3.shtml</a><br /><br />

HOF Results
 

Posted By: <b>fkw</b><p>Raines could hang in the "cokehead wing" with Jenkins and Cepeda, and Rose and J.Jackson could hang in the "game fixer wing" with Speaker and Cobb.<br /><br />Edited to add: What Gwynn was talking about "Players knew, Managers knew, Owners knew, We all knew"...... was that it was a part of the game at the time and common knowledge.<br />I played in the mid 1980s (at a low level) and steroids was everywere, and well known even in college. Just take a car trip into Tijuana or Ensenada and 1 hour later have some Deca in hand.