Trekgeekscott
Posts: 39728
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MDK
quote:
ORIGINAL: El Duderino
I don't get how Griffey gets the highest percentage ever. He absolutely should be in, but a higher percentage than Babe Ruth, Bob Gibson, Joe DiMaggio, etc? I guess I just don't understand how HoF voters think.
The problem isn't that Griffey gets a high percentage, the problem was with voters in the past who no matter who they were voting for, a few felt compelled to vote against obvious choices so there wouldn't be 1st ballot unanimous selections.
There were 9 voters out of 415 who didn't vote for Hank Aaron.
11 voters of 226 didn't vote for Ruth
http://www.cheatsheet.com/sports/top-10-mlb-hall-of-famers-by-highest-vote-percentage.html/?a=viewall
This year, a lot of the older baseball writers (who are probably senile and dependent of depends)
Immediately following the wildly successful Hall of Fame induction class this past summer, the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum’s Board of Directors announced significant and meaningful changes to the Baseball Writers’ Association of America’s electorate. One of the greatest feelings of animosity towards the voting process rested squarely on the shoulders of electors who were no longer active, but still possessed extraordinary power in bestowing baseball’s greatest honor upon a ball player. How could someone who hasn’t actively covered the sport in years honestly assess a ball player’s credentials in a day and age where comprehensive information is transmitted within seconds across several social media platforms?
Some of the dickhead voters refused to vote for anyone from the steroids era including Greg Maddoux and Randy Johnson.
Many are no longer eligible to vote.
And that is a good thing.
I really don't get the idea that someone would not vote for a guy, not because they didn't think he deserved it, but because of some ridiculous ideal that nobody should be unanimous, or should get in on the first ballot. That's just stupid.
Either a guy is worthy or he isn't.
And that brings me to the limit of 10 on the ballot. Why not allow more if more were worthy?
Some of the most dominant players in the sport can't get a sniff at the hall because of the uppity nature of some of these nutjob writers.
They need to consider that even though PEDs are a negative to the sport there was no testing for it, Baseball's complicity is practically glaring, and the herculean feats these bloated behemoths saved the sport after the 1994 WS cancellation debacle. There was NOT EVEN A STANDARD IN PLACE TO PUNISH THESE PLAYERS. No rules to break, so they were breaking no rules.
That to me means Clemens, Palmeiro, Bonds, McGwire, Sosa and anyone else associated with the "steroid" era should be punished for it. The didn't break any rules and baseball was more than happy to look the other way while they were saving the sport with their PED enhanced bodies.
_____________________________
'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored… the first thought forbidden… the first freedom denied – chains us all irrevocably - Jean-Luc Picard when quoting Judge Aaron Satie.
|
Printable Version
RE: MLB General Information PT 4 - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread