Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyCox3
You make valid points. As someone who is on the opposite side of this argument, I agree with nearly all of what you're saying here.
We all know how long it took Newhouser to be inducted. Frankly, it should never have happened.
I would gladly see Hal's HOF plaque relinquished, as well as removing some of the 19th century leagues (if it proves sensible after more continued study) if this latest decision was obliterated.
The only thing that we can't do that much about is the diminished talent pool of the WWII-era MLB. It has to stand for the sake of continuity.
(Not that any of these things would ever happen, outside of perhaps the eventual exclusion of the 19th century leagues, but I'm doubtful of that as well.)
|
Fair enough. I can appreciate the perspective and consistency.
I'd argue though, that we need to take it further. After black players, despite being a tiny fraction of the overall players early on, they won the NL ROY in 1947, and every year in the 5 years from 1949-1953.
If we take the best players in baseball who played most of their career after WWII, there are at least as many elite black players as white players. Most top 10 lists include 5 players from after WWII: Musial and Williams are white, and Mays, Aaron and Bonds are black. Some lists add Mantle, which would make it even. As you go further down the list you have Frank Robinson, Joe Morgan, Ken Griffey Jr, Rickey Henderson, Bob Gibson, Roberto Clemente, Pedro Martinez, Roy Campanella etc.
If you don't believe that the Negro Leagues should be included, there's an argument that all of MLB before integration shouldn't either be. Since it is clear that at roughly 50% of the high of the greatest players likely were barred from playing.