- This topic has 93 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I don’t know if Molina will receive 75% of the vote in the first year or not. It may depend on others on the ballot, but he and Albert going in together may intrigue the voters as it does fans.
The internet is full of articles evaluating Molina’s Hall of Fame case. Of all the ones I’ve read (not Cardinals biased), this is the most thorough. The author’s conclusion:
“Sometimes a player transcends their numbers. Yadier Molina is one of those players. He belongs in the Hall of Fame.”
Whether it is year one or later won’t matter over time.
https://www.cooperstowncred.com/has-yadier-molina-framed-his-hall-of-fame-case/
Glad that McGriff got in. The only other two on that list that I would consider are Mattingly and Murphy.
As for Yadi, yes I think he gets in on the first ballot.
Curt Schilling was the first that should have gotten in…he has an 80-lifetime WAR compared to 52 for McGriff. I wanted Schilling, Murphy and McGriff to get in and all should have.
I agree with BW, that the idea of Pujols and Molina being inducted into the HOF in the same year together would definitely draw some appeal and hold some interest to both the voters and fans alike. I certainly hope they go in together, but I think that the chances of that happening are less than good. Voters can be both unpredictable and even a bit flighty at times. If the voters really wanted to illustrate how genuinely silly they can behave at times, they’d vote Molina in on a first ballot and make Pujols wait…Haha!
If bonds,Clemens, and palmeiro should never get in, big papi, Mike piazza, Alex rodriguez, bagwell, maybe some others shouldn’t be in there.
Rodriguez isn’t a member of the HOF. He and Palmeiro are the only two players you mentioned to have received a suspension for taking on high octane fuel.
GameCard…If anyone’s diminishing the credibility of the baseball HOF, it’s the voters. They once again did so by neglecting to recognize Schilling as a well deserved and legitimate member of Cooperstown.
Yes Rodrigues isn’t in the hall but big papi is and he tested positive. Clemens never tested positive neither did bonds, so same boat as bagwell and others who are suspected.
Ortiz was never confirmed to have tested positive for PED’s. “Anonymous sources” claimed that he “allegedly tested positive.”
Let’s just call a spade a spade.
Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson are not in the HOF because of gambling.
Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, A. Rod, Palmeiro, and Clemens are not in the HOF because of PED’s.
Schilling is not in the HOF because of his extreme political comments.
We can argue until the cows come home about the merits but those are the reasons. Not all HOF selections are based on the on the field numbers. There is definitely some subjectivity involved and if you offend the wrong people you pay the price.
Yeah maybe, but when did an individual’s political beliefs and the right to express them become a basis for being penalized? It’s my view that in this country if someone is indeed penalized for exercising their right to do so, it constitutes a serious violation committed against the individual being targeted. In simple terms, it ain’t right.
I don’t care the reason Schilling is not in the Hall Fame and I just glad he isn’t. Big Papi did not deserve to going in based on his numbers.
Schilling absolutely should be in the HOF…period. Opinions are not a reason to vote against him. I disagree with everything that Jack Flaherty stands for but I want him to win every game for St. Louis.
That’s awesome GameCard but I am still glad he isn’t. If there was a Financial Disaster Hall Fame he would be a chartered member.
This is Flaherty’s final arb season so he will be playing for a contract. In ST I imagine he will go all out to pitch his way into the rotation. If he can stay on the field we will see the best he’s got.
Yep, ’23 is Jack’s showcase season and I’m certain he’s well aware of that fact. I’m hopeful that he makes the best of it and the Redbirds get a nice performance out of him before he moves on to another ballclub at season’s end. I’ve seen comments on here as well as other baseball websites that proclaim him as a “headcase.” He doesn’t impress me as such. However, he does impress me as a young man who is unhappy. Obviously, I have no way to understand why that may be the case. Maybe he’s simply unhappy to be a member of the St. Louis, Cardinals. At any rate, he’ll sink or swim in ’23.
I think it’s a disgrace not to have Schilling in the HOF. His bloody sock game alone is almost enough right there to vote him in.
1982 Willie, I completely agree that if some of those players you mentioned didn’t get in, then maybe some others shouldn’t be in there. And anybody with half a brain knows who those ‘some others’ are.
I feel like there’s maybe been an odd development over just the past 15-20 years when it comes to Hall Of Fame standards, and to a certain extent the very meaning of Hall membership.
While it’s very tempting, very seductive to just look at the back-of-the-baseball-card numbers, being inducted into the Hall Of Fame is not a right that a player earns on the field. It is an honor that’s bestowed. A lot goes into that. And the Hall voters are very specifically instructed as follows:
Voting — Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.
So we see that it’s not merely a “character clause” that’s keeping some people out of the Hall. Three of the six criteria are explicitly integrity, sportsmanship, and character. That covers a great deal of ground. And voters who ignore integrity, sportsmanship, and character are clearly violating the rules of the Hall Of Fame, as surely as a jury that ignores the instructions from the Judge presiding over a court case.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.