Let's talk about Hall of Fame candidates who have been "neglected"

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

The team that scores the most runs wins, but games are decided in the 9th inning. That's when you need to win the game. You can't win the game with 7 strong.

A run scored is a run scored. A run prevented is a run prevented. If you didn't give up the 2 in the first, you would be in a dramatically different place heading into the 9th.

[packs]

No. If you score 3 in the first and the score is 3-2 in the 9th, you don't win for scoring 3 in the first. You win when the 9th inning is over and you're still ahead.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

No. If you score 3 in the first and the score is 3-2 in the 9th, you don't win for scoring 3 in the first. You win when the 9th inning is over and you're still ahead.

Disagree fundamentally.

Is there any other team sport with specialists who play only at the end of the game?

[packs]

IF you're a football fan you're probably familiar with your kicker.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by packs

IF you're a football fan you're probably familiar with your kicker.

Only a handful of Kickers are in the HOF. I do agree there should be more.

But Kickers and Punters play the entire game. I have seen missed field goals that occur in the first half, which undoubtedly cost their respective teams many many games.

[abothebear]

The kicker is a bad analogy. That is a distinct part of the game requiring distinct skills. A better one would be a two-minute drill quarterback.

[abothebear]

A two minute drill quarterback who only comes into the game when there is a lead. He specializes in ball control and clock management. If only there were players like that to elect into the football hall!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

IF you're a football fan you're probably familiar with your kicker.

Kickers kick the whole game.

[abothebear]

Asserting that the game is decided or won in the 9th doesn’t make it true.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by abothebear

Asserting that the game is decided or won in the 9th doesn’t make it true.

It's a truism just like saying golf is won on the 18th hole because the game ends there, but it isn't meaningful because in golf every stroke counts and in baseball every run counts equally.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If a golfer misses a birdie putt on 1, and then misses a birdie putt on 18 that would have tied him for the lead, both shots are of equal consequence, although of course to the observer the miss on 18 might seem more critical.

[packs]

I don't think things are as philosophical as that. Sports are practical. Best score wins. Your score is not recorded until the game is complete. The game cannot be completed until it's finished.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't think things are as philosophical as that. Sports are practical. Best score wins. Your score is not recorded until the game is complete. The game cannot be completed until it's finished.

To me you are offering truisms but not reasoned logical analysis which to me dictates that all scores count the same and are therefore equally important.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Why isn't an eighth inning hold as valuable as a ninth inning save? Do holders now deserve a place in the Hall?

[JollyElm]

And round and round the arguments still go...

Peoplewithhulahoops.jpg