|
Quote:
|
So based on the HOF standards any player on the 2017/18 Astros roster
shouldn't be eligible for the HOF correct? |
No one has silenced Curt Schilling. He is free to say and do whatever he wants. There is a difference between facing the consequences for what you say and being able to say what you want. Whether you think those consequences should carry over to something like HOF voting is up for debate. But I don't think it can be argued that Schilling can't say and do what he pleases.
|
I haven't followed Curt Schilling's post-career issues
What specifically is it that would change a voter's mind from "Yes he's a HOF'er" to "No"? Without venturing too far into political talk. Although if it's for things he said or wrote, is the First Amendment considered 'political'? |
Quote:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-much-awesome/ As others have said, he is free to say or post what he wants, but there can always be consequences to doing that. The first amendment allows him to say what he wants, but it doesn't force reporters to vote for him for the Hall of Fame if they don't want to. |
Quote:
|
Curt Schilling belongs in the Hall of Fame. It's terrible that politics and the "cancel culture" has penetrated into the halls of Cooperstown.
|
Quote:
Personally, I don't buy that argument. But I also can't exclude anyone from the HOF who is on the ballot. That's telling me that MLB and the HOF both believe that they are eligible. As opposed to Pete or Shoeless Joe, who are not on the eligible list. If MLB or the HOF don't want them in the HOF, then suspend them from baseball and take them off the ballot. Stand up and make a decision MLB and HOF. It's the same no-show of leadership that Selig practiced his entire tenure as Commish. |
MLB and the HOF aren’t keeping Schilling out. Writers aren’t voting for him. Which is their right. Nobody has “cancelled” Schilling. He very possibly will get in through one of theVeterans Committees.
And no, doesn’t matter when Rose bet on baseball. Stupid on his part. |
Quote:
|
Is it possible that over 25% of writers actually think he wasn't HOF material? It's not like he was Greg Maddux. I don't think the Hall is watered down in any way if he isn't in there.
|
Quote:
I personally don't care whether he gets in, but do wish it was based solely on his performance as a player. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Thanks for reminding me...as I said, it was late and I'm old...should be so near a keyboard that late. It has to do with exactly who is on the veterans committee...Frankie Frisch got a lot of his teammates in (Haines, Lindstrom...to name a few that did not belong)- I don't like Tony Larussa being on it either. . . |
Quote:
|
Quote:
As I said previously, Schilling is borderline either way, and his preclusion from the HOF won't cause me one minute of lost sleep. I respect all opinions as well as the fact that this forum is reserved for baseball and not politics. |
Quote:
We have become a society where many/most people are constantly asking for tolerance and inclusion yet they fail to practice what they preach. I, too, don't really care whether Schilling gets in or not. He's definitely not a slam dunk. However, excluding him because of what he has said, although over the top at times, is wrong. He has committed no crime and has broken no law. This would set a horrible precedent. I'm hard pressed to come up with a candidate that has been rejected from induction for similar reasons. |
Yes, agree Veterans Committee has let players in that should not be in the HOF. Why later after all the years of regular voting can the VC override the regular NO vote? Not good when VC says YES due to the Buddy system/Politics/other. Baines being in is a complete joke, a big ugly blemish on the HOF.
Then we have guys not in the Hall who actually did something significant, maybe actually started a few All-Star games, won an MVP award or two, were truly famous for their on-the-field accomplishments. Ticks me off to see such things happen to the game I love. But alas, life is not always fair. Learned that long ago. ______________ Steve Parmentier |
Quote:
I know, I don't have the names of the folks, but the writer did go unnamed in the report. So take it as you wish. |
Quote:
|
I don't care if it's Frankenstein's monster, a dude that puts up these numbers should not only be in the Hall of Fame, but should be a centerpiece:
WAR Position Players 1987 NL 5.8 (9th) 1988 NL 6.3 (7th) 1989 NL 8.0 (3rd) 1990 NL 9.7 (1st) 1991 NL 8.0 (1st) 1992 NL 9.0 (1st) 1993 NL 9.9 (1st) 1994 NL 6.2 (2nd) 1995 NL 7.5 (1st) 1996 NL 9.7 (1st) 1997 NL 8.2 (4th) 1998 NL 8.1 (1st) 2000 NL 7.7 (3rd) 2001 NL 11.9 (1st) 2002 NL 11.7 (1st) 2003 NL 9.2 (1st) 2004 NL 10.6 (1st) Career 162.8 (1st) MVP (rank, share) 1990 NL (1, 99%) 1992 NL (1, 90%) 1993 NL (1, 95%) 2001 NL (1, 98%) 2002 NL (1, 100%) 2003 NL (1, 95%) 2004 NL (1, 91%) 7 MVPs |
Schilling was on the ballot eight other times previously and didn't get in. The first time he was on the ballot he was at 38% or something like that. Why is it suddenly now that people upset about him not getting in the eight other times he was on the ballot?
2013: 38.8% 2014: 29.2% 2015: 39.2% 2016: 52.3% 2017: 45% 2018: 51.2% 2019: 60.9% 2020: 70% 2021: 70% |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
One of the most egregious omissions by the "writers" was not inducting Johnny Mize into the HOF in the late 1950's (or early 1960's). Johnny waited 23 years to finally be inducted into the HOF by the Veterans Committee in 1981. https://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan...bphotomize.jpg I first met Johnny at the Meadowlands, NJ BB card Show in the Fall of 1981. I was set-up at this Show. Johnny was the guest signer. His table was adjacent to mine. For 2 hours (in between "Big John" autographing), we had some really nice conversations Talkin' BB. Before he left, he invited me to visit him in Demorest, Georgia, whenever I should be traveling down South. On our way to Florida in 1987, I side-tracked into Georgia and visited with Johnny at his home. We reminisced for an hour (or more) about the "good ole days". I recall asking him why he was traded by the Cardinals (1941), and then the Giants (1949) when he was playing some really great BB. Johnny replied...... " I asked Billy Southworth (Mgr. St. Lo) for a pay increase. Southworth said no. Johnny told him....Pay me, or trade me ! " This scenario was repeated with Durocher (Giants Mgr). The genius of Casey Stengel acquiring Johnny in 1949 benefited the Yankees during their 1949 - 1953 "dynasty" years. OK, having said all that, it's contemptible that the writers did not vote Curt Schilling into the HOF this year. He had 70% of their vote last year. This year it was 71%. Shows you that a good number of these writers are just a bunch of "political hacks". How does any one involved in Sports deny a Pitcher who achieved a Post-Season 11 - 2 Won - Lost record from being in the HOF ! ? Show me another Pitcher in ML BB who comes close to that record. Furthermore, Schilling has devoted a lot of his time, energy, and $$$$ for the ALS Foundation, and other Charities. ENOUGH SAID ! TED Z T206 Reference . |
Quote:
Thanks for a great story involving Mize. I've heard nothing but positive things about him. You look at his numbers and something just doesn't add up. How was he not elected sooner? As to your point about Schilling, it's purely political at this point. Diamondbacks and Red Sox, do not win without him. He's one of four pitchers to strike out 300 batters in 3 seasons. He had 3, 20 Wins seasons as well. How he isn't in already, on numbers alone is shocking. |
Quote:
.312/.397/.562 OPS+ 158. 14th all-time in SLG, 16th in OPS, 17th in OPS+. Mize gets over looked because he lost 3 full seasons of his prime to the war and didn't hit magic milestones. Today he would be a 1st ballot Hall of Famer. My favorite stat is in 1947 he hit 51 HRs and struck out 42 times. The only time in history that a player hit 50 HRs with less than 50 SO. He led the NL in HRs 4 times and each season had less than 50 SO (in fact only one time did he SO 50+ times in a season with 57 in 1937). |
Quote:
|
1 Attachment(s)
|
Just curious. Not sure if it is this year or next year, but when is the vote on Dahlen and other players of his era?
|
Quote:
|
Gonna respond to lots points all at once here:
1) Why do people bring up that steroids weren't banned when discussing them? Does it matter? They were illegal, as in against the law. MLB doesn't have a rule against armed bank robbery either but do we really think somebody wouldn't be punished for committing one? 2) Lots of people talking about stuff Curt Schilling has said - FYI, advocating for the murder of journalists isn't an "opinion" - but no one talking about what he did. Let's not forget he ripped off the state of Rhode Island to the tune of $75 million. 3) Somebody asked for another example of somebody who had 100+ RBI in 7 straight seasons and isn't in the Hall, like Gil Hodge. Here ya go: Albert Belle, who did it in 9 straight seasons. Belle belongs in the Hall, btw, and should be an absolute no-brainer. Personally, I don't care if players did PEDs. I've gone back and forth on that over the years and have decided I no longer care. There are guys in the Hall that did them - Piazza, Bagwell, Ivan Rodriguez, to name three - and they were ALL OVER THE game in the 90s and 2000s. Hitters and pitchers using them. It's impossible to separate that guys that did them from the guys that didn't. And, besides players, there's already two guys in the Hall who benefited from them (Bud Selig and Tony LaRussa, whose criminal history seemed to bother no one). So, no, I wouldn't keep somebody out based on their PED usage. I will say, though, the idea of David Ortiz getting in before Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens makes my head spin. He couldn't carry the jock of Bonds or Clemens and definitely couldn't without the roids. |
Quote:
Concerning point one I've said multiple times that "it wasn't illegal then" as my argument, but really thinking about it, I don't think it's an issue of legality. Granted I cannot speak for others, I think that it's not so much that steroids were against the rules, or their legality, it's the fact that, the owners and the commissioner made out like bandits from guys like Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, etc but when it comes time to give the players their due for helping propel the sport post strike or keep baseball's popularity heading into the 2000's they shun them. Another thing I take issue with is the fact that the Writers that were voting for guys like Clemens, Bonds and Rodriguez to win the MVP are mostly the same writers, that are now in charge of putting them in keeping them out of the hall of fame. Concerning two, well that's a very fair assessment, I completely forgot about his failed video game company. Concerning Three and the ortiz issue, I agree on both fronts. Belle Belongs in the Hall of Fame, and if Ortiz gets in before Bonds and Clemens my head will spin |
Ortiz must still be on roids because he looks exactly the same now as he did when he played, unlike say, mark McGuire...
He had one test that came back positive and we don’t have any idea for what. He was tested many, many times over many years and never had another positive test yet kept putting up great numbers. He was never ripped like Bonds, just kind of roly-poly. I’m not convinced Ortiz was dirty. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk |
Quote:
"he" didn't rip off the state of Rhode Island. That's your opinion. His company accepted a bond sale from thre state t move his company to Rhode Island. They went bankrupt and the state charged his company with fraud for the fact they weren't forthcoming in their projected sales etc. They settled for 2.5 million. Schilling maintains his innocense. He also lost 50 million of his own money. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
So, yeah, he - and his company - ripped off the state. |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:06 AM. |