- This topic has 572 replies, 34 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
As I stated when the candidates were announced, I did not think Freese earned Cardinal Hall honors based on his career, but his 2011 post season exploits deserved a display in museum. Heck, even Dal Maxvill has a higher Cardinal WAR than Freese.
But the curators of the Cardinal Hall obviously feel that statistical contributions to the franchise are not the only criteria for being worthy of induction. Special moments are given consideration as well.
As others have opined, it would have been better for David to have spoken up before the ballot was presented. But to his credit, that is a humbling decision. I am surprised he did not accept it and in his heart think something like “I am not really a Hall of Famer in the sense of Stan or The Rajah, but it is a terrific honor to be recognized along side those guys for my moments in the sun.”
I don’t judge his decision, but yes, the timing was poor and there is a player on the 2023 ballot that deserves to be inducted who is not going to be honored.
That’s a crap move by freese in my opinion. Being in the cards hall of Fame costs him nothing from what I know. The Cardinals should not have anymore days honoring him. If he had spoken up before the voting, I would have respected it more. All he did was cost someone more de
Yeah Carlton! Who the dumb ass bfib voted over. Lol
I think a lot more went into this decision than just “I’m not a Cardinal HOF’er.”
Freese clearly had some issues when he played here. He was literally the toast of the town in his hometown and couple things happened off the field. Might be not wanting to live in the past or a trip down memory lane for him. Sure he struggled with this choice and I’m sure Freese landing will be sacrificial lamb by the ownership. They don’t like being shown up but I’m glad he had the stones to take himself out.
bikemike said:
But the curators of the Cardinal Hall obviously feel that statistical contributions to the franchise are not the only criteria for being worthy of induction. Special moments are given consideration as well.
It is important to remember that this is a fans’ Hall of Fame. Our only decision as the nominating committee was whether or not to put him on the ballot. This was his first year eligible. It was discussed extensively. We all knew that if he went on the ballot, the fans would vote him in. Freese had to know the same months ago…
As far as worthiness, the team HoF has gotten to be more a recognition of notables within the organization over its history. The various members of the comittee and ownership group all want their favorites in there as do current fans. Given some of the other members, I wouldn’t have a problem with Freese. That’s not to excuse the snub which was lame.
I think Freese is correct in thinking that he didn’t deserve to be in the HOF. He didn’t. He had one famous game out of a very average career. It is unfortunate he waited until now to say something.
blingboy said:
The various members of the comittee and ownership group all want their favorites in there…
That is not relevant. To be clear, for Modern Era players such as Freese, all the committee does is vote on who goes onto the ballot. The fan voting decides the one player who goes in annually.
Because of the dilution of members, the DeWitts decided to drop from two Modern Era players to one.
My personal take, which is not worth anything, is that I preferred to cut from two to one some time ago. Also, I did not think Freese would be a great choice. But he was voted onto the ballot because it seemed clear that is what the majority of fans would want and there would be objections if he was bypassed (snubbed) from being on the ballot. That was correct. The fans got what they wanted, as the voting was considerable in his favor.
Regardless if it goes down to one the ownership knows its a weekend they’ll get the big spenders and red jackets in town. I for one would like it to go down to one player only. It’s watered down.
Once the owners and committee get there favorites in, it can go down to one. Assuming anyone is left.
Yeah, Brummer would be good too! He could slide into HP and then get up and brush the dirt off that red jacket…
Bling, please share how you think committee members get their favorites in when it is the fans who do the voting. I must not be explaining clearly…
The only selection that is chosen without voting is the ownership pick, which had not been made for several years. This year, they selected Jose Oquendo. Does anyone feel that isn’t deserving? Would Dave Duncan be a bad pick? How about Helene Britton?
A problem with one pick only is that people from the distant past who are not recognized by the more casual fan, who tend to know more recent players only, would never get in.
I had to look up Helene Britton. I thought she may have been a baseball player. I recently became a first time paw-paw of a little baby granddaughter. Her dad’s left-handed, so I’m hoping she will be too. She seems to take a firm grip on that baby bottle with her left hand and I’m genuinely hoping that in the not too distant future she’ll stroll out to a Big League mound as the first female pitcher to thoroughly dominate and embarrass all those big hairy legged guys that step into the batter’s box…She’s got a chance to be good one!
Pete Kozma is vastly more deserving than Brummer. See 2012 NLDS. Talking about Brummer is just silly.
Haha!…Yeah, Kozma needs consideration…They’ll have so many guys wearing red jackets that Paul Revere will be shouting out the alarm to the minutemen!
Pete Kozma is vastly more deserving than Brummer. See 2012 NLDS. Talking about Brummer is just silly.
It was intended as sarcasm to point out the absurdity of HOF consideration based on one shining moment. I can think of about 20 former Cardinals more deserving to be in the HOF than Freese.
Speaking of old timers, no not you 1TD – a guy I would like to see considered is the great Pete Alexander. He not only had a signature moment in the team’s history, but won 55 games for the club with a winning percentage of .618, and a decent 15 WAR. His big moment occurred in game seven of the World Series no less.
Similar to Carlton, Alexander’s best years were with the Phillies. But his career was in reverse, being a Philly first. Oh, and if all of that was not enough, we got him after the Cubs waived him. The Cubs thought he was done, and we got 55 more wins out of him plus the 1926 World Series heroics.
FWIW, I did not vote for Freese. Love the guy, but no. I voted for Steve Carlton and will continue to do so until he gets in or is no longer on the ballot.
I voted for years for Keith Hernandez before he got in. I never voted for a few of the players who did get in.
Fan voting leads to popularity contests. This has always been the case for the All-Star game (and that’s fine) and does the same for the Cardinal Hall of Fame.
I was just playing off yours gscottar. As if Kozma is any more legit. But if that team had gone all the way we might be talking about him going in alongside Freese.
Pete pretty much counterbalanced his hero status when he botched the exchange at Fenway on an almost certain GIDP that opened the proverbial gates. If it weren’t for that, he’d be a shoo-in…
My voting is in line with the way Marilyn went. I voted for, and lobbied on this forum for Keith Hernandez for several years.
I also voted for Carlton this year, and have in the past as well although last year I voted for Matt Holliday.
I didn’t vote for Holliday, mostly because I knew he would get in without my vote.
Seriously, Carlton can get into Cooperstown but he can’t get in to the Cardinals little museum?
It doesn’t matter to me that he had his best seasons in Philly, he was still a good Cardinal. It wasn’t his fault that Gussie Busch was an a*hole penny pincher.
I voted for Carlton as well.
As you might expect from my avatar I would also like to see strong consideration for Jack Clark. He was only here three years but he put up big numbers in ’85 and ’87, was an all star both years, and was top 10 MVP both years. He also had a huge shining moment in Game 6 of the ’85 NLCS. His one big caveat would be some controversial and adversarial comments about Pujols.
Jack Clark likely blew his chance when he accused Pujols of juicing.
I have ambivalent feelings about Clark myself.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.