HOF Election - and the Elephant in the Room:

[ClementeFanOh]

Every time I read one of these threads, I cringe. It's a necessary topic, but
there's no way for a commenter to make certain statements without
someone going berserk over it- "everybody has used PEDs since the dawn of
time", "just let them all in", "player A should be in because player B is in",
etc. Now someone writes PEDs should be mandatory in MLB- hard pass (if
I have to explain why, I don't think there's much I can do to help).

MLB is now reaping what it has sown, and it's sad. It's difficult to feel good
about so many of these candidates, and some of the mild recent inductees
don't make it easier. I can say this for sure, I'm happy collecting vintage
players and not bothering with all these "question mark" guys. Before the
naysayers can get it out, I am NOT suggesting the players from yesteryear
are on the short list for sainthood. The problem is that many of the current
candidates are a graceless bunch, have been for many years, and the
process seems stuck in a continual tailspin- ugh.

Trent King

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by ClementeFanOh

Every time I read one of these threads, I cringe. It's a necessary topic, but
there's no way for a commenter to make certain statements without
someone going berserk over it- "everybody has used PEDs since the dawn of
time", "just let them all in", "player A should be in because player B is in",
etc. Now someone writes PEDs should be mandatory in MLB- hard pass (if
I have to explain why, I don't think there's much I can do to help).

MLB is now reaping what it has sown, and it's sad. It's difficult to feel good
about so many of these candidates, and some of the mild recent inductees
don't make it easier. I can say this for sure, I'm happy collecting vintage
players and not bothering with all these "question mark" guys. Before the
naysayers can get it out, I am NOT suggesting the players from yesteryear
are on the short list for sainthood. The problem is that many of the current
candidates are a graceless bunch, have been for many years, and the
process seems stuck in a continual tailspin- ugh.

Trent King

Well said Trent.
I would only add the shameful behavior imo of the current commissioner, owners, and media embracing gambling on baseball will only reap similar negative consequences as Bud Seligs weakness did.
That being said, if Bud Selig gets in the Hall while keeping Joe Jackson out, let's just say the bar has been lowered to a pretty low level.

[G1911]

It won’t open the floodgate if Sheffield manages to get in, because they don’t care at all about consistency. Rules for some and not for others. Ortiz was already elected and they were happy to ignore it for him. The steroid standard now seems to be about whether they like the candidate or not, which is in line with the other off-field centric elections of the last few years. Statistics don’t seem to be the most key aspect anymore to being in or out. Feels like we are in another era of selections being made for the wrong reasons, like the early 19th century player choices and the corruption of the Frisch committee era.

[ronniehatesjazz]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Well said Trent.
I would only add the shameful behavior imo of the current commissioner, owners, and media embracing gambling on baseball will only reap similar negative consequences as Bud Seligs weakness did.
That being said, if Bud Selig gets in the Hall while keeping Joe Jackson out, let's just say the bar has been lowered to a pretty low level.

I agree with the sentiment, and to me the biggest problem is that it's a large hall instead of a small one. If Bonds or one of the others isn't able to join Ruth, Mays, Mantle, etc. for breaking rules it's not such a big deal but when guys like Harold Baines are basically sent in his place it becomes a joke.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by ronniehatesjazz

I agree with the sentiment, and to me the biggest problem is that it's a large hall instead of a small one. If Bonds or one of the others isn't able to join Ruth, Mays, Mantle, etc. for breaking rules it's not such a big deal but when guys like Harold Baines are basically sent in his place it becomes a joke.

I think this is a very valid point. The Hall however, moved away from the "Small Hall" mentality, when the original Veterans Committee, started committing acts of cronyism and electing all of their buddies to the Hall of Fame.

I'm in the camp that Bonds, Clemens, Rodriguez, etc should be in the Hall. I'm not trying to convince anyone to believe in my opinion, but the more guys like Pudge Rodriguez, David Ortiz, and if this election goes his way, Gary Sheffield get in, it's harder to find justifiable reasons to keep those first three guys I mentioned, out.

[packs]

I don't think Sheffield has a real chance of getting elected. My guess is he tops out at 60%.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by Seven

I think this is a very valid point. The Hall however, moved away from the "Small Hall" mentality, when the original Veterans Committee, started committing acts of cronyism and electing all of their buddies to the Hall of Fame.

I'm in the camp that Bonds, Clemens, Rodriguez, etc should be in the Hall. I'm not trying to convince anyone to believe in my opinion, but the more guys like Pudge Rodriguez, David Ortiz, and if this election goes his way, Gary Sheffield get in, it's harder to find justifiable reasons to keep those first three guys I mentioned, out.

Personally, I'm against any of the 'cheaters' getting in...putting them on the same level of honor as someone like Hank Aaron is just WRONG.

Remember, it's an honor, not a right.

If they ever get in, it should be posthumously...or at least after I'M DEAD!


.

[Touch'EmAll]

MLB has always wanted to send a very clear message that certain things are not acceptable.

Do they change their tune now, after over 100 years ? If they do change their tune, what impact will that have going forward ? And if they change their tune now, will a very clear message still be sent that certain things are not acceptable ?

Answers not needed, just food for thought.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Personally, I'm against any of the 'cheaters' getting in...putting them on the same level of honor as someone like Hank Aaron is just WRONG.

Remember, it's an honor, not a right.

If they ever get in, it should be posthumously...or at least after I'M DEAD!

.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again, I totally understand where you're coming from, and I respect that opinion. I fully agree, it should be an honor, and not a right.

To be frank, however, the sanctity of the Hall has long since been violated in my opinion. Cheaters are already in, cheaters will continue to get in, long after we are all gone.

[Mike D.]

Sheffield is at 75% now, but no way he gets elected this year. I think the PED crowd eventually gets in, but it'll probably be in a certain order, with Bonds/Clemens first, then McGwire, then some of the other guys, with the "failed a test after testing" guys last or never.

On Ivan Rodriguez, I feel he was "punished" by at least part of the electorate. He got in his first year with 76% of the vote. If not for PED suspicions, that % would have been 90%+ (he's #3 all time among WAR for catchers).

Same for Bagwell, who took SEVEN turns on the ballot to get elected. Piazza? Four times.