Hall of Fame Announces "Old Timers" Ballot

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

I definitely think Bud Selig should go in.

Now, before you get all hyped up, think about the positive (business-wise if no other way) changes he implemented.

MLB is vastly better than it was before Bud Selig. IMHO

I think he ignored the obvious PED use for far too long to ever go in IMO.

[Exhibitman]

Personally, I'd like to see more recognition for non-players who contribute to the game. Not just broadcasters and managers. For example, Marvin Miller absolutely is integral to the story of the game and should be installed in the HOF ASAP.

I'd also like to see Sy Berger and Jefferson Burdick in there!

[BearBailey]

I would think selig would be a lock, can't imagine anyone else getting close?

[dealme]

I've never understood why the HOF and its voters seem to feel a need to vote people in every year. If there wasn't an induction every year, it would be more of an event in the years that there was.

I am of the opinion that the Hall is watered down as it is, and I don't grasp the concept that because a candidate only has X years left on the ballot, he's somehow more worthy of inclusion. In my opinion, Raines falls into this category. He was certainly a good ballplayer, but is he now more worthy of induction simply because he's about to drop off of the ballot? I also thought that Ron Santo's induction was a slap in the face (to Santo). It's as if the voters felt that since he had passed, he somehow became more worthy of induction.

I think that if there is any question as to whether a player should be in the Hall (be it his on-field performance, PEDs, criminal record, etc.), then he probably shouldn't be in the Hall. The only way this group should get into the Hall is the same way that most of us do: buy a ticket.

[Tao_Moko]

Originally Posted by dealme

I've never understood why the HOF and its voters seem to feel a need to vote people in every year. If there wasn't an induction every year, it would be more of an event in the years that there was.

I am of the opinion that the Hall is watered down as it is, and I don't grasp the concept that because a candidate only has X years left on the ballot, he's somehow more worthy of inclusion. In my opinion, Raines falls into this category. He was certainly a good ballplayer, but is he now more worthy of induction simply because he's about to drop off of the ballot? I also thought that Ron Santo's induction was a slap in the face (to Santo). It's as if the voters felt that since he had passed, he somehow became more worthy of induction.

I think that if there is any question as to whether a player should be in the Hall (be it his on-field performance, PEDs, criminal record, etc.), then he probably shouldn't be in the Hall. The only way this group should get into the Hall is the same way that most of us do: buy a ticket.

Santo's induction was a sad moment for me because, like you say, he apparently got more of a nod after death and nobody would have been more grateful than Ron to have been part of that celebration. Selig is knocked out for me based on his poor handling of ped's early on and also not fond of using the public to subsidize stadiums that no longer have affordable ticket pricing. However, he's been much better than most of his predecessors. The players on this ballet are in no way contenders in my opinion. I would like to see the HOF get back on a more elite track. *I'm never fond of armchair generals talking to me about their opinion of war/combat as there is only one way to truly have an opinion on it. Not that sports is anything comparable, but I do rely on the veterans committee to guide my opinion since I've never been more than a baseball spectator.

[bigtrain]

Originally Posted by dealme

I've never understood why the HOF and its voters seem to feel a need to vote people in every year. If there wasn't an induction every year, it would be more of an event in the years that there was.

I think that what most people don't realize is that while the Hall of Fame is a national institution, it is run by local people. Cooperstown is mostly small businesses that make all their money in about four months of the year. Induction is a very big deal to the locals. A year without a player being inducted is bad for the local economy. So while there have been years without inductions, I think the rules have been changed to make that less likely.

[scotgreb]

Larry - I don't believe it has been announced yet . . .

The Today’s Game Era ballot was determined this fall by the Historical Overview Committee, comprised of 11 veteran historians: Bob Elliott (Toronto Sun); Jim Henneman (formerly Baltimore Sun); Rick Hummel (St. Louis Post-Dispatch); Steve Hirdt (Elias Sports Bureau); Bill Madden (formerly New York Daily News); Jack O’Connell (BBWAA); Jim Reeves (formerly Fort Worth Star-Telegram); Tracy Ringolsby (MLB.com); Glenn Schwarz (formerly San Francisco Chronicle); Dave van Dyck (Chicago Tribune); and Mark Whicker (Los Angeles News Group).

The 16-member Hall of Fame Board-appointed electorate charged with the review of the Today’s Game Era ballot will be announced later this fall. The Today’s Game Era electorate will meet to discuss and review the candidacies of the 10 finalists as part of Baseball’s Winter Meetings, Dec. 4-5 in the Washington, D.C. area.

[dealme]

Originally Posted by bigtrain

I think that what most people don't realize is that while the Hall of Fame is a national institution, it is run by local people. Cooperstown is mostly small businesses that make all their money in about four months of the year. Induction is a very big deal to the locals. A year without a player being inducted is bad for the local economy. So while there have been years without inductions, I think the rules have been changed to make that less likely.

This is certainly an angle I hadn't really considered in my first post. The handful of times I've been to Cooperstown were not during induction weekend, and probably would be considered "off" times (although they were during the baseball season). I didn't think about economic impact. It would be interesting to look at sales numbers for induction years versus years without an induction. All of that being said, it seems that if people are being inducted during a given year because an induction is good for the local economy, then it's a bit of the tail wagging the dog.

Cheers,
Mark

[JollyElm]

God, if that's the list of potential candidates, why don't they just enshrine everybody who has ever played the game and just be done with it.

[Jim65]

The only player I would consider is Belle, personality aside, he was a better player than some already there like Andre Dawson and Jim Rice.

Steinbrenner was a criminal, twice suspended by MLB, if he ever makes it, it would be a friggin joke.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Personally, I'd like to see more recognition for non-players who contribute to the game. Not just broadcasters and managers. For example, Marvin Miller absolutely is integral to the story of the game and should be installed in the HOF ASAP.

I'd also like to see Sy Berger and Jefferson Burdick in there!

Berger I could get behind. Burdick not so much, but there's no way in hell I'm praising the guy responsible for the $400 box seat.

[slidekellyslide]

The hall of fame is not watered down in my opinion. They've been playing major league ball for 147 years now and 18,918 men have played in the major leagues. There are only 217 major leaguers in the hall of fame. One out of 87.

It's really hard to get into the major leagues. It's really hard to succeed in the major leagues, and it's really, really hard to excel over a career in the major leagues. When people say players like Tim Raines do not belong in the hall of fame it boggles my mind.

[KingFisk]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

The hall of fame is not watered down in my opinion. They've been playing major league ball for 147 years now and 18,918 men have played in the major leagues. There are only 217 major leaguers in the hall of fame. One out of 87.

It's really hard to get into the major leagues. It's really hard to succeed in the major leagues, and it's really, really hard to excel over a career in the major leagues. When people say players like Tim Raines do not belong in the hall of fame it boggles my mind.

Agreed, with a caveat. It's safe to say the number of inductees is fine. It's just that a bunch of guys who are in shouldn't be, and a bunch of guys that should be aren't in.

[z28jd]

Would never vote in Selig or Steinbrenner. Selig was the head of baseball during the steroid era when everyone knew what was going on and he let it go, then took zero blame for it. The guy in charge of the players who don't get in because of steroids is supposed to be rewarded for letting it happen? Hell no. He made a fortune off those players because he let it go as long as possible.

Steinbrenner shouldn't even be on the ballot. He was suspended from baseball for two years in 1974. He was banned permanently in 1990. He was also an owner during the steroid era, who happily paid steroid users extra money for their performance.

When the owners took none of the blame for that era, that was a cowardly move on their part. Everyone outside of baseball knew what was going on, do you really think any of the owners had no idea? They knew, they paid the players extra and they made a ton extra for themselves, then they threw the players under the bus and history has been way too kind to them.

It would be ridiculous to put the leader of the steroid era and an owner from that era with a two-year suspension and permanent ban on his record, in the Hall of Fame. It would make a mockery of common sense.

[Griffins]

Originally Posted by z28jd

Would never vote in Selig or Steinbrenner. Selig was the head of baseball during the steroid era when everyone knew what was going on and he let it go, then took zero blame for it. The guy in charge of the players who don't get in because of steroids is supposed to be rewarded for letting it happen? Hell no. He made a fortune off those players because he let it go as long as possible.

Steinbrenner shouldn't even be on the ballot. He was suspended from baseball for two years in 1974. He was banned permanently in 1990. He was also an owner during the steroid era, who happily paid steroid users extra money for their performance.

When the owners took none of the blame for that era, that was a cowardly move on their part. Everyone outside of baseball knew what was going on, do you really think any of the owners had no idea? They knew, they paid the players extra and they made a ton extra for themselves, then they threw the players under the bus and history has been way too kind to them.

It would be ridiculous to put the leader of the steroid era and an owner from that era with a two-year suspension and permanent ban on his record, in the Hall of Fame. It would make a mockery of common sense.

Spot on.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by z28jd

Would never vote in Selig or Steinbrenner. Selig was the head of baseball during the steroid era when everyone knew what was going on and he let it go, then took zero blame for it. The guy in charge of the players who don't get in because of steroids is supposed to be rewarded for letting it happen? Hell no. He made a fortune off those players because he let it go as long as possible.

Steinbrenner shouldn't even be on the ballot. He was suspended from baseball for two years in 1974. He was banned permanently in 1990. He was also an owner during the steroid era, who happily paid steroid users extra money for their performance.

When the owners took none of the blame for that era, that was a cowardly move on their part. Everyone outside of baseball knew what was going on, do you really think any of the owners had no idea? They knew, they paid the players extra and they made a ton extra for themselves, then they threw the players under the bus and history has been way too kind to them.

It would be ridiculous to put the leader of the steroid era and an owner from that era with a two-year suspension and permanent ban on his record, in the Hall of Fame. It would make a mockery of common sense.

This.

[pclpads]

Bud Lite? That's a joke, right?

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by KingFisk

Agreed, with a caveat. It's safe to say the number of inductees is fine. It's just that a bunch of guys who are in shouldn't be, and a bunch of guys that should be aren't in.

I won't argue that. The Veterans Committee is at fault for most of that.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

I think he ignored the obvious PED use for far too long to ever go in IMO.

We ALL did, Dan. And we all enjoyed the McGwire-to-Sosa-to-McGwire HR chase!

Financially, it was good for the game - though it is a good thing that it is over or, at least, not nearly so prevalent thanks in no small part to the new testing system that Selig helped put in place.


c

[earlywynnfan]

I really think Selig will get in, if not this year, eventually. Steroids or not, baseball grew more during his era than any other.

Belle was the scariest hitter of the 90's, but his career was too short. Or, to put it another way, his persona was so negative that voters won't overlook how short it was.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

I really think Selig will get in, if not this year, eventually. Steroids or not, baseball grew more during his era than any other.

Belle was the scariest hitter of the 90's, but his career was too short. Or, to put it another way, his persona was so negative that voters won't overlook how short it was.

Albert Belle was a later version of Richie Allen - many parallels.


c

[rats60]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

I really think Selig will get in, if not this year, eventually. Steroids or not, baseball grew more during his era than any other.

Belle was the scariest hitter of the 90's, but his career was too short. Or, to put it another way, his persona was so negative that voters won't overlook how short it was.

Not because of anything that Selig did. From the cancelled World Series, to Steroids to the All Star game tie to making the All Star game count for World Series home field. His time on the job was a disaster.

Baseball has been declining in popularity over the last 25 years. Outside of the World Series, televised games are not even on the major networks anymore, but on niche cable channels. TV viewership is way down. Even with the Cubs winning the World Series, and huge game 7 viewership, average viewership was about half of what it was for the 1978 World Series and behind almost every year in the 80s and 90s. Viewership from 2008-15 was a disaster. I guess if Selig's job was to make owners money while damaging the game, he was successful, but that isn't hof worthy in my opinion.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by rats60

Not because of anything that Selig did. From the cancelled World Series, to Steroids to the All Star game tie to making the All Star game count for World Series home field. His time on the job was a disaster.

Baseball has been declining in popularity over the last 25 years. Outside of the World Series, televised games are not even on the major networks anymore, but on niche cable channels. TV viewership is way down. Even with the Cubs winning the World Series, and huge game 7 viewership, average viewership was about half of what it was for the 1978 World Series and behind almost every year in the 80s and 90s. Viewership from 2008-15 was a disaster. I guess if Selig's job was to make owners money while damaging the game, he was successful, but that isn't hof worthy in my opinion.

Any opinion worth having is worth voicing...bravo

[earlywynnfan]

I'm impressed at the raw hatred for Selig about steroids. Yes, I think they are and were wrong. But where was this venom in the 90's? I know forums like this didn't exist then, but can anyone show me anything written then about how awful they were? Any articles? Letters to the editor?

I paid a LOT of attention to baseball in the 90's, with the Tribe finally being good. With the exception of Rick Reilly's Sosa-chasing article, virtually NOBODY was complaining. Everybody could see it, but nobody complained. How many of you guys went to games? How many took up sides and cheered for McGwire or Sosa? Or Bonds or Clemens??

For about a decade in the 2000's, the big beat writer for Cleveland's newspaper would absolutely rail against steroids. Yet I read him every day in 1998, and he never said a word!! No writers I read did. And these people were in the clubhouses, were constantly around the players. I send this guy emails commending him on his firm stance 10 years after the fact, but never got a reply.

Selig and Fehr were the point people of the steroid era, sure, but anyone in and around baseball at the time was involved. If any of us who went to games, cheered the home runs, is calling out Selig now, I say we're hypocrites.

[packs]

I really don't understand the Steinbrenner hate. Some of you guys collect Comiskey, how can you hate Steinbrenner and call him a criminal but collect Comiskey? The same goes for Tom Yawkey. The guy actively worked against integrating his team, so much so that they were the last team to integrate. He's in though, isn't he?

[z28jd]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

I'm impressed at the raw hatred for Selig about steroids. Yes, I think they are and were wrong. But where was this venom in the 90's? I know forums like this didn't exist then, but can anyone show me anything written then about how awful they were? Any articles? Letters to the editor?

For me, the hatred came on later. The home run chases were great to watch, even if I knew it wasn't on the level. I was smart enough to know what was going on and knew it wasn't a small percentage of players.

The problem with Selig came well afterwards when people started praising him for cleaning up baseball. He is the one who was in charge and let it get out of hand. He didn't start cleaning it up on his own, it had to be pushed on baseball to straighten up.

The fact that Selig and the owners went from making fortunes over these players while turning a blind eye, to acting shocked when they found out and getting zero blame, makes me mad. It's maddening because many people just went along with it and the players are the only ones getting hurt.

Him and the owners getting any praise for what they did would be like a parent being the getaway driver as their kids rob banks, getting 60% of what they stole, then getting a parent of the year award for letting them go to jail for life after they've already been sentenced.

In fact, I would vote in any steroid era player before I voted in an owner, league president or commissioner from that era. The players were the ones who were paid more and given the incentive to do steroids to keep up with the other players doing it. The people in charge encouraged that era, they deserve blame, not praise, and definitely not a Hall of Fame plaque, that's just ridiculous to even consider.

I'd like any guy on here with a little kid to try a Selig experiment. Give your kid crayons and tell them to color a wall in the house until they get caught and make sure you are sitting there watching them do it the whole time. Then tell your wife you had no idea what was going on, paint the wall, and then let me know how big your father of the year trophy is when you get it.

[basesareempty]

Harold Baines


Batting average
.289

Hits
2,866

Home runs
384

Runs batted in
1,628

Solid stats and borderline HOF. Knee injuries early in his career probably cost him 3000 hits which would have gotten him in.

[Louieman]

Well I can't speak on behalf of others but my dislike for used car salesman Bud Selig has been very consistent since he started. But I was a kid in the 90s...let me sift through my mom's garage and see if I have any fingerpainting or personal narratives that conveyed the message....

[packs]

Something I think should be recognized re: Selig is how much harder he made it for regular people to attend a game as a family. Under his watch 19 publicly funded stadiums were built. It now costs an average of $77 for 2 people to attend a game. In 1993 it cost a family of 4 $91 to attend a game.

[bbcard1]

I would not be aghast if most of those guys would get in. I would not be offended if not. Davey Johnson and Pinella are sort of a Red Schoendienst type, though I think lesser, who had some accomplishments as both players and managers. Baines and Belle fit fine statistically. If your bottom measuring stick is Jim Bottomley and High Pockets Kelly, maybe there's a place for Clark...McGwire defined an era that was both glorious and tragic... I would be happy if here was not an executive in the hall. It is of no interest to me.

[basesareempty]

Edgar Martinez


Batting average
.312

Hits
2,247

Home runs
309

Runs batted in
1,261

I know over the years that people have thought Martinez should get in. If that ever happens then Baines needs to be in as well. Just saying.

[Stampsfan]

Originally Posted by trdcrdkid

What an underwhelming group. Who picks these?

Bud Selig.

Originally Posted by packs

Something I think should be recognized re: Selig is how much harder he made it for regular people to attend a game as a family. Under his watch 19 publicly funded stadiums were built. It now costs an average of $77 for 2 people to attend a game. In 1993 it cost a family of 4 $91 to attend a game.

There might be one or two other items in our society that have doubled in price over the last 23 years.

[ASpaceman]

Belle & Schuerholz.

Belle is criminally underrated.

[packs]

Originally Posted by Stampsfan

Bud Selig.


There might be one or two other items in our society that have doubled in price over the last 23 years.

You don't see a correlation between building huge overpriced stadiums and overpriced ticket prices since the building of those stadiums? We're not talking about inflation.