Hall of Fame Ballot Announced

[Snowman]

Bonds and Clemens both deserve to be in the hall IMO.

[Jim65]

I used to be against Bonds, Clemens and Palmiero getting in the HOF but now that we have a known PED cheater in, its unfair to keep them out.

McGriff should get in, Belle and Schilling are deserving but probably do not get in.

[bxb]

My understanding is that there are 16 voters, who get a maximum of 3 votes each. This leads to a total of 48 votes maximum.

Players must get 75% to get in (i.e. 12 or more of the 16 voters).

So at most 4 players can get in (48 divided by 12).

Somebody double check my math here, I have not had my morning coffee yet.

[ejharrington]

Schilling should get in.

[mrreality68]

All worthy in their own way that is why they are on list
But with doping, politics, and injuries effecting longevity (Mattingly) they all have questions.
McGriff and Shilling should be the Easy in but it will be interesting to see what happens with them and the rest.
Look forward to Dec announcement
Just wish we knew who the voters were and wish all ballots were made public

[Yoda]

McGriff's association with Halle Berry should be worth something.

[jingram058]

I don't see any of them as HOFers. Want another Harold Baines fiasco? The HOF is suffering from credibility as it is. Especially Schilling. He shouldn't get in on the strength of being an all-time moron. Right or wrong, that's how I feel.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Yoda

McGriff's association with Halle Berry should be worth something.

I thought that was Dave Justice.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Yoda

McGriff's association with Halle Berry should be worth something.

You're thinking of Dave Justice.

[philo98]

delete

[bmattioli]

Originally Posted by Jim65

I used to be against Bonds, Clemens and Palmiero getting in the HOF but now that we have a known PED cheater in, its unfair to keep them out.

McGriff should get in, Belle and Schilling are deserving but probably do not get in.

Who are you referring to?

[jamest206]

No strike, no PED’s. Let them in!

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by bmattioli

Who are you referring to?

David Ortiz.

Ortiz himself has confirmed he failed a test. It's not a rumor, it's not "supposedly", etc.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/d...sted-positive/

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Tabe

David Ortiz.

Ortiz himself has confirmed he failed a test. It's not a rumor, it's not "supposedly", etc.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/d...sted-positive/

I believe the current version of the narrative from Ortiz fans is that it doesn’t count because MLB won’t certify it (they can’t) and it wasn’t supposed to be public (like basically all wrongdoing in human history, and every players use). Thus Ortiz should be let off the hook, but everyone else who is not a Red Sox player or media darling can be punished. You know it’s a loser of a case when this is the argument they are left with.

[drmondobueno]

Why not Rose and Joe Jackson?

Using the old arguments are at least hypocritical and at best self serving.

Besides, I want a price bump on my Rose collection when he goes into the hall

[BobC]

Originally Posted by drmondobueno

Why not Rose and Joe Jackson?

Using the old arguments are at least hypocritical and at best self serving.

Besides, I want a price bump on my Rose collection when he goes into the hall

Because under the current HOF rules a person currently banned by MLB is ineligible for election to the HOF.

[HistoricNewspapers]

Originally Posted by G1911

I believe the current version of the narrative from Ortiz fans is that it doesn’t count because MLB won’t certify it (they can’t) and it wasn’t supposed to be public (like basically all wrongdoing in human history, and every players use). Thus Ortiz should be let off the hook, but everyone else who is not a Red Sox player or media darling can be punished. You know it’s a loser of a case when this is the argument they are left with.

If Ortiz was a vocal Republican then it would have been used against him and he would not be in...kind of like how Curt Schilling is being kept out. Writers have bias. Whoever on the committee will have bias. Its the nature of the beast. Some have it work in their advantage, some don't.

Ortiz should not be in while the other better players who may have used as well are not in.

If Schilling is not in due to his personality, then the same standard should be applied to every player, and then Dale Murphy should be in due to his personality being exemplary.

Nobody is a capable judge on someone else's character unless they see that person's actions 100% of the time and every second of their life. All they see is an incomplete picture either positive or negative. There are a lot of wolves in sheep's clothing and you never really know.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by HistoricNewspapers

If Ortiz was a vocal Republican then it would have been used against him and he would not be in...kind of like how Curt Schilling is being kept out.

Ortiz should not be in while the other better players who may have used as well are not in.

If Schilling is not in due to his personality, then the same standard should be applied to every player, and then Dale Murphy should be in due to his personality being exemplary.

The VC's numerous iterations have always made some poor choices, and had much corruption and cronyism. The writers, while I have disagreed occasionally, have done a generally good job with those they elected. The writers have really turned their vote into a joke now, by embracing that same corruption and cronyism to reward their pals and punish their enemies, with seemingly little regard for actual accomplishment.

If Ortiz is in, so should Bonds and Clemens and others who were undeniably better than Ortiz but kept out for being guilty of the same crime he is. Schilling being kept out as a political enemy is just as bad. If Schilling was an asshole who shared a meme joke about hanging Oath Keepers or whatever-the-boogeyman-of-the-day is, he would be voted in with little comment (actually, he'd probably be lauded for his 'brave stand'). It's not his 'personality', it's his personality as a political enemy. The writers used to treat the Hall as a baseball accomplishment; they no longer are. Perhaps one day we can return to rationality.