But including Cecil Travis in the HOF doesn't elevate it from irrelevant to relevancy. You disagree with selections but that's what makes the debate spirited and a debate at all. I don't think that makes the HOF irrelevant. If it were irrelevant it wouldn't stir up any emotions in people at all.

Criticize away because the players that chose to participate in it knew what they were doing and opened themselves up when the first injection or pill was taken. I looked at McGwires not choosing to answer as "guilty" because anybody that understands PEDs and users knew what was going on.

I can still remember Arnold Schwarzenegger denying his use of steroids when he started to rapidly bulk up. A few years later he just came out and admitted it because he probably knew people were going to figure it out in time.

Justin,

I don’t necessarily disagree with much of what you said regarding the hall itself, but I would urge you to stop if for no other reason to take in the museum portion of the operation. It’s truly amazing in my opinion.

Regards,
Mark


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree and thank you for this post. BTW, I'm quite proud of my HOF card collection. Just purchased a Crime Dog rookie last night!

There are always going to be players at the margin for whatever reason(s) -- no matter what voters are engaged. I expect that if any of us endeavored to choose the 341 [eligible] individuals -- or more so, the 269 players, we believe should be in the HOF, the overlap would be quite large. If you had the current BBWAA vote toward the top 269 today -- no chance they would all be the same -- and it would be different ten years from now even with the same BBWAA voters. The Hall (and its membership) was not built at a point in time. It's a much different proposition when building it over nearly 100 years. I mean, how many of us would include ten umpires?

I thought McGwire eventually admitted to PED use prior to his getting hired as a hitting coach for the Cardinals. I don't know if that was a condition of his being hired, but I seem to remember that was the timing of it.

Found this link that seems to confirm my memory of the timing:
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-for-the-cards

It's worth noting that not everyone's candidacy is so quickly judged. I mean, it took Blyleven 15 years to get elected, and he's 13th all time in WAR for starting pitchers.

At the time, there were huge groups of people who argued he wasn't deserving. Nowadays, you don't see him on many "shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame" lists.

Cecil Travis? His career was too short, even taking into consideration his military service. The problem is everyone has a different idea of who should be in the Hall of Fame. What about Jim McCormick? Or Adrian Beltre? Or Bill Dahlen? Or Bobby Grich?

Thanks for the link. It was great till the end when he completely lied in a way to make himself look better. That was just sad. If those pills and injections didn't work nobody would take it and we wouldn't have got all those crazy numbers.

Not the world's biggest McGwire fan, but for everyone stating he is still deflecting steroids that is wrong. He admitted it more than 12 years ago to clean the slate when he returned to baseball. Not sure how that was forgotten, it was a bit of big deal at the time.

I do enjoy buying the steriod players for dirt cheap, If they do make the hall there will be no deals to be had.

Because I can be incredibly pedantic at times, I'll point out that the NBA doesn't have a HOF.

Edward. Thanks for pointing out Travis. Had never heard of him before your post and enjoyed reading about his career and service. Definitely in the category of "What might have been?" like so many others whose careers were disrupted by health issues, military service, etc.

Re: health, consider the great Dave Orr
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Orr

Had he not had a stroke...

Based on an admitted pedant's specifications, I will agree there also are none for MLB, NFL, and NHL as well ;)

What did he do that you labeled him a "moron" ?

He went on anti-Semitic public rants, plural, that made him appear to be a classic "moron" in every sense of the word. Go look it up...

I did not. Do you not know what quotation marks signify?

No, enlighten me.

I di look it up. It seemed he was labeled an anti semite for asking why Jews vote demoncrat in elections. Now a days, labels have become cheapened..

Pretty clever, condescender.

Well, you could try actually reading next time.

The Hall of Fame started on a downward spiral once the early stages of the corrupt Veteran's committee was put into place. So many of their selections are suspect, as they were busy trying to get their friends into the Hall of Fame.

I've also been very vocal about this, there are known cheaters in the Hall of Fame. Many people hold a "holier than thou" attitude about players, even if they so much as experimented with a pharmaceutical drug. Meanwhile Pud Galvin, Babe Ruth, and Mickey Mantle experimented with animal testosterone. Mays And Aaron took amphetamines at least once. And on that subject, God knows how many players were popping Greenies like they were M&M's in the clubhouse either, or high off of painkillers in order to pitch.

I don't want people citing character clauses either. Cap Ansons in the Hall of Fame, the guy that was probably responsible for segregating the game, Commiosner Landis is in, the man that upheld said segregation. It was rumored that Tris Speaker had ties to the KKK.

My point being, the Hall is a place that commemorates and celebrates the greatness of baseball. How these men achieved that greatness, or their dealings outside of the game of baseball should not matter. Voters can't play the moral police for one group of players but not another.

It's a no win problem. If you ban anyone, there are inevitably going to be people who cheated below the radar who get in or people who are judged by a different standard, and it ends up an arbitrary unfair mess. If you just say fuck it let everyone in, you reward behavior that clearly broke the rules of the game and almost certainly secured an advantage over other players. Lose lose.

Unfortunately you're right, Peter. I agree with you. I did get a little ranty, my apologies!

Originally Posted by Seven View Post
The Hall of Fame started on a downward spiral once the early stages of the corrupt Veteran's committee was put into place. So many of their selections are suspect, as they were busy trying to get their friends into the Hall of Fame.

I've also been very vocal about this, there are known cheaters in the Hall of Fame. Many people hold a "holier than thou" attitude about players, even if they so much as experimented with a pharmaceutical drug. Meanwhile Pud Galvin, Babe Ruth, and Mickey Mantle experimented with animal testosterone. Mays And Aaron took amphetamines at least once. And on that subject, God knows how many players were popping Greenies like they were M&M's in the clubhouse either, or high off of painkillers in order to pitch.

I don't want people citing character clauses either. Cap Ansons in the Hall of Fame, the guy that was probably responsible for segregating the game, Commiosner Landis is in, the man that upheld said segregation. It was rumored that Tris Speaker had ties to the KKK.

My point being, the Hall is a place that commemorates and celebrates the greatness of baseball. How these men achieved that greatness, or their dealings outside of the game of baseball should not matter. Voters can't play the moral police for one group of players but not another.


Peter_Spaeth:
It's a no win problem. If you ban anyone, there are inevitably going to be people who cheated below the radar who get in or people who are judged by a different standard, and it ends up an arbitrary unfair mess. If you just say fuck it let everyone in, you reward behavior that clearly broke the rules of the game and almost certainly secured an advantage over other players. Lose lose.
*****************
Yeah this is pretty much where I come out. I do think Schilling presents a peculiar problem -- he should be a HOFer but I fear his induction ceremony would be bad for the institution (the HOF) and even the major leagues. His speech would likely be provocative in ways that could really damage the institution. I don't just mean complaining about the process or saying "its about time." I'm not talking about just saying things that just aren't "PC." I fear bona fide hate speech.
But I guess the institution could survive a PR disaster and maybe .
I also don't think Pete Rose cuts it so long as he faces a lifetime ban. (after that -- his demise -- you can put him in and I guess Shoeless Joe and Eddie Cicotte too)
I would urge that the plaques not whitewash things too much for guys like AROD, Palmeiro, and Manny Ramirez who have been found to have cheated. To me they are different from Bonds, Clemens and Sosa who are all-but-universally considered to have used PEDs but were not "found guilty" by baseball.

Classic false equivalence/two wrongs make a right fallacy. One past mistake does not legitimize all future mistakes. A concrete example: I am driving down the road minding my own business doing a steady 85 just like everyone else and I get pulled over. Do I get to skate on the ticket because everyone else was speeding too? Nope. Other speeders are not a defense to my conduct. The fact that the HOF has a number of miscreants in it does not justify voting for another one.

It's also a slippery slope fallacy. Since you can point to imperfect results with the existing system, the whole system is invalid.

Just because some people get in who aren’t HOFers doesn’t mean the HOF is on a downward spiral. It’s still the hardest HOF to get into. Only about 1 percent of all players over the last 150 years are elected to it. If you have a one percent chance of getting into the baseball HOF it’s doing it’s job.