Dawson only inductee..........

[familytoad]

Alomar is/was clearly a HOF in my book. I won't repeat the impressive stats from the last post...but c'mon...how many second basemen have ever compiled the all around speed, defense, extra base power numbers he has?Playing on a championship team usually helps everyone out too. Check.
This one is an easy pick.

But the whole first ballot thing is dumb. Maybe the writers are trying to use it as a delineator for past members who were voted in, but don't really compare to some of the all-time greats.
I've seen many discussions that mention creating an "inner circle" for ATG's and perhaps being a "First Ballot HOFer" is an attempt to create that separation. Dunno, but put in Alomar on his second try!

Blyleven is in a tough spot for me. I can't overlook that many wins , K's and 60 shutouts. To a certain degree, that is domination over his opponents (the opposing team) and that's what players are supposed to do. I can live without another borderline HOFer being elected though.

As said earlier, two wrongs don't make a right...and there are MANY players already elected who were far from dominant. Bert is right on the line, and it appears the voters think so too...

I think Tim Raines and Andre Dawson (and Jim Rice for that matter) are excellent examples of players for whom you can compare HOF-eligibility to.
My rule would be, you must be BETTER than those three players, without much debate..and you are in!
If you are almost as good as Rice, Dawson and Raines (toss in MANY others on either side of the line), or just slightly better ...you are out.

[Chris-Counts]

Roberto Alomar retired with a .300 lifetime batting average, 210 home runs, a .371 on base average, 474 steals, won 10 Gold Gloves and was the best player on a team that won back-to-back World Series. If you think those stats aren't worthy of the Hall of Fame, you'll have an easier time convincing me the earth is flat ...

[nolemmings]

.

[pwilk17]

All I read and hear about are lifetime statistics of players when it comes to deciding whether or not they are worthy of the Hall of Fame. I agree that this is very important and should be the main criteria used for the vast majority of candidates. However, if it truly is a Hall of Fame then Don Larsen definitely deserves to be in. Same thing with the Hockey Hall of Fame. Paul Henderson definitely deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. However since they are Halls of Statistics, they are not members. And yet they are far more famous than most of the members in their respective halls.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by pwilk17

However, if it truly is a Hall of Fame then Don Larsen definitely deserves to be in.

I believe his perfect game is represented in Cooperstown, I think that is enough.

[bigtrain]

but by any standard, I think he is in the top 10 or 12 second basemen of all time. He and Blyleven both just missed this year and are likely to be elected next year. I love the Hall of Fame and visit every year so I really enjoy these debates as to who should be elected and who should not. The problem as I see it is that most of us think of the Hall as a place for only the greatest "elite" players, Ruth, Mathewson, Johnson, Wagner, Cobb, Mays, Aaron and the like. The fact is that almost from the beginning, certainly from the 1940s and 50s, it has been the Hall of Very Good. I'm sure that we can all rattle off a dozen names that arguably don't belong there. How about Rick Ferrell, Tinker, Evers, Chance, Tommy McCarthy, Schalk, Hooper, Haines, George Kelly, Bottomley, Lindstrom, Hafey, Marquard, Bancroft, Combs, Coveleski, Faber, Hack Wilson, Chuck Klein? There are almost 20 questionable members off the top of my head. I could easily argue more modern selections were also mistakes. My point is: should the Hall standards now be raised after 70 years? I think that too much time has passed to now try to transform the HoF into something it is not.

[bigtrain]

Barry, I think they would hold an induction for other award winners regardless of whether a player is elected by the BBWAA or the Veteran's Committee. Most Hall of Famers do attend induction. They have a banquet and golf tournament among other events. This year they are starting a new tradition, a parade down Main Street on Saturday night. Although I don't think that Dawson and Herzog will draw a big crowd, many people do come to town to see the Hall of Famers, get autographs, attend the card show etc. I would think attendance would be down this year due to the economy as well as the lack of a big drawing card. With a smaller crowd, this might be the ideal year to go.

[Bosox Blair]

Originally Posted by bigtrain

I'm sure that we can all rattle off a dozen names that arguably don't belong there. How about...Hooper...

I hear this a lot, but don't accept it.

A few points about Hooper:

- He was a lead-off man with more pop than most,
- His job was to score runs - he scored 1429 of them (#79 all time), averaging 100 per season over his entire career,
- Top 100 all time in career base hits,
- #39 all time in triples, which means, in that era, both speed and power,
- Drew over 1000 walks, averaging 80 per season,
- Glove? Not even a question. One of the greatest. Key component of what many regard as the best outfield of all time,
- World Series? Unreal with both glove and bat. Won 4 World Series titles with Red Sox. The key player who was a constant in all 4 Red Sox championship years. First player ever to hit 2 home runs in a single WS game in 1915,
- Also stole 375 bases,
- The first and longest part of his career was played in the dead ball era with Boston. He hit .272 over this period. He went to Chicago roughly when the lively ball came into play and after that - in the twilight of his career - he hit .302...pretty good evidence of the effect of the lively ball on the stats of some players.

So I strongly disagree with the widely-held idea that Hooper does not belong.

I also disgree with the old chestnut that Tinker-Evers-Chance are in because of a poem. Evers for the reasons best set out by Bill James. Chance's career as both a player and a great manager combined make him worthy.

Cheers,
Blair