2019 MLB HOF Class...

Yeah, most all hall of fames could be done in 3 hrs. It all depends how much time you want to dedicate to staring at a glove or bat from 1915.
Thr rock n roll hall of fame is the one place you could go and spend the day there.

 

i heard the smithsonian has so many halls and exhibits, you need several days to get through each one. the space one alone is 1 day. the history one is 1 day and so it the television one. haha.

 

Interesting, only been to the DC airport on a stopover. We have a place called the science centre, you put your hand on a static ball and your hair goes up in the air (that was the 70s). I hear you could spend a day there easy, if you're into science

 

I've done Air & Space and American History (includes the TV stuff but a LOT more than that) for the Smithsonian...they are entirely separate buildings altogether...I think there's 8 or 9 separate musuems plus the zoo all under the Smithsonian umbrella. Anyway, each one was definitely a full day take and totally worth it. Highly recommend both. And the price is right, too lol.

 

To see Harold Baines get in, I went WTF, he was a very good player in his time but he was no Hall of Famer, not even close, but yet, here he is. I think this is the fall out of the Steroid Era hurting the Hall overall. The guys that didn't take the roids, in our humble opinions, when we were watching them, they fell into the class of the very good, while us not knowing at the time (before all the fall out with the roids) the guys that were juicing, were guys that we thought should get in.

We, as baseball fans, have lost an entire generation of Hall of Famers, due to the juice and the greed of it all that drove these players to cheat their way to millions and millions of dollars.

Now since the steroid users are tainted, the class of the very good is basically the only guys that can be selected on a clear Conscience. This opens up the possibility of quite a few "clean" players that ,at first glance, because they were a notch below our "cheaters" normally not having a true shot at the hall, are now going to get in because they were the BEST of the "clean" pool.

I am ok with this because they did it the RIGHT way and kept it clean.

 

yeah they were also a notch below their fellow peers who got into the HOF. they were a notch below them for a reason - they were not hall of famers. being put in because the steroid guys can't get in and they were clean isn't a reason to put them in. sorry but baines. steve garvey, mattingly, dale murphy and others aren't hall of famers. i don't think jim rice, gary carter and some others are either that played in the 70's and 80's and they got in on the real ballot. these new committees are going to let in a bunch of guys the regular voters didn't deem worthy of enshrinement. that's sad.

 

Gary Carter isn’t a HOFer? What now?

 

Care to elaborate as to why? These all seem like just as good as any when it comes to the Hall.

 

Not to mention as that article that was posted earlier stated, there's always been room in the Hall for the "very good" player, and enshrinement has become much harder over the years. I mean if you're a "the HOF should only be Babe Ruth and maybe like 2 other guys" guy, then I can understand not wanting the second tier guys in, irrespective of the number of second tier guys that are already in. But I can't for the life of me figure out how Gary Carter isn't a first tier player. If he's not a HOF'er, than you really might as well just call it the Babe Ruth and Some Other Dudes He Allowed To Play Baseball With Him Museum and kick everyone else out.

 

maybe i was a little harsh on Carter.

the HOF is not just Babe Ruth and some guys that played with him. Mariano RIvera is a lock Hall of Famer. Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Tony Gwynn, Cal Ripken, Roberto Alomar, Wade Boggs, George Brett, Mike Schmidt and many others are HOF worthy. They are the top of the HOF. By allowing in some players that could be fringe hall of famers or tier 2 or 3 hall of famers you weaken the hall itself. is Harold Baines a Hall of Famer? If you have to make excuses for a player to be in the HOF, then he's not a HOF'er! Sorry, this isn't your High School HOF. It's the Baseball HOF. Huge difference.

Could the HOF do without some questionable inductees ? absolutely. there are 20-30 that could be cut from the HOF. These new committees aren't doing anyone any favors letting in tier 3 fringe players.

 

it took him 6 ballots to get in and only got in by a 78% of the vote, so even the voters didn't think he was the lock you're making him out to be u dog.

 

Well I'm pretty sure we all generally agree the writers are fucking stupid. I wouldn't want to use their inability to do their jobs properly as support for my argument.

 

to the HOF should be the greatest ballplayers ever. it's not just about Ty Cobb and Babe Ruth or Christy Mathewson or Walter Johnson. those 4 alone are legends and titans of the game. i just don't think a Jim Rice or Harold Baines or some others are truly hall worthy. If you gotta dig through their stats or come up with a raitonale to why they should be in the HOF, then they aren't HOF'ers. It took Carter 6 ballots to get in. Why wasn't he a first ballot guy ? Or second ballot? Same for Mike Mussina, who needed 8 tries. Edgar Martinez needed 10 tries. That's a lot. Baines, Smith, Morris and Trammell didn't get in on the real vote and yet got in on a special committee? why? why does a HOF need any special committees? it should be the regular ballot and that's it. Baines was off the regular HOF ballot as he failed to get 5% of the vote but some committee feels he deserves it? that's telling the real voters to go fuck off and they will put in who they want ! is that right? doesn't that weaken the hall ? it does to me.

i read an article last night that said dick allen who fell 1 vote shy of getting in the hall on a special committee will be a lock with the 2020 special committee. really ? a lock ? so these new committees are the escape clause to those who didn't get in before ? that's not right.

 

Well I'd flip that around and say - why was Tom Glavine a 1st ballot guy and Mike Mussina needed 8 tries, when they were very similar pitchers other than the fact that Glavine won 35 more games? The answer is simple - sometimes, nay a lot of the time, the voters are just fucking wrong. Rogers Hornsby got about 40% of the vote on the original HOF ballot.

You know I agree with you that the committee approach is tremendously flawed, but that doesn't inherently mean that the regular voters always got it right, either.

Dick Allen was a stud, pure and sample. But he was also a pain in the ass who basically lost interest in playing baseball by the time he was 32 years old. If he had hung on for another 5 or 6 or 7 years and padded his counting stats, he'd've been in long before now. He was Frank Thomas if Frank Thomas had quit early. He's a perfect example of a player the regular voters were completely wrong about.

 

Glavine won 305 games, a World Series and 2 Cy Young Awards, Mussina didn't. What do you mean about Frank Thomas or did you mean Dick Allen?

I don't know much about Allen except for his personality and he disliked the sports writers. Just checked his stats and he only had 3 seasons of above 100 rbis? that seems really low for a guy with 351 hrs ? his stats seemed to die after the age of 32. why did he stop caring about baseball then ?

 

I mean Dick Allen was as good a hitter as Thomas. Their stats through age 32 were very similar.

 

ah ok. Thomas kept playing and got over 500 hrs though. live Glavine and 300 wins, that was why he was a first ballot HOF'er.

 

Gary Carter was inducted in the hall of fame in 2003 as an Expo.

 

Carter didn't get in on just his offense, he defined what it meant to be a defensive catcher and had an incredible arm to throw out runners stealing.

Having said that, he didn't get in on defense alone either, four seasons of over 100 rbi's and 324 hrs pushed him over the top.

 

sorry im not big on carter and his .262 average. he was an all-star catcher to me, not a hall of fame one.