Hof Induction On Wednesday.who Doyou Want In

[dirtyla2000]

I Wantandre Dawson And I Want Him In As An Expo,both Reasons Are As A Fan And As Acollector!

[zookerman182]

Robby Alomar needs to get in.

[NYCrulesU]

Alomar, Blyleven & Dawson. In that order.

Blyleven should have been inducted years ago. It's a shame.

[Rob L]

Blyleven!!!

[BoneRubbedBat]

Who do I want to go in? Dawson, Blyleven, Alomar, McGriff, and McGwire

Who do I think will make it? Blyleven.

[legaleagle92481]

In order:

1. Roberto Alomar
2. Barry Larkin
3. Andre Dawson
4. Fred McGriff
5. Jack Morris

I realize that only Alomar is likely to make it this year and that the later two will probably never make it but to me these are the only eligible guys who should be hall of famers and are not. McGwire was a one dimensonal player who's one dimenson was enhanced who knows how much by the steroids and andro he used. Lee Smith, Harold Baines and Bert B. were stat accumulators who were never considered great in their time. Edgar Martinez, Don Mattingly, Alan Trammall and Dale Murphy were very good players who just did not have enough great years.

[Manram]

I would like to see Blyleven and Alomar make it

[NYCrulesU]

Now and until the day I pass, I will laugh at the phrase "stat accumulator".

Isn't that what every player does? They accumulate stats over their career. Whether it be 5 yrs or 25 yrs. Some players are gifted enough to amass certain numbers in 15-18 yr careers, while it may take another player 22 years to amass near identical numbers.

What's the difference? Really.


Is Rickey not worthy of 3000 hits because it took him 25 or so years?

Would Biggio had made the HOF without 3000 hits, that took him 18 years to get?

Is Nolan Ryan's 5,714 K's any less impressive even though it took him 27 seasons to amass those? In which he ONLY won 324 games in that same time.

Clemens took 24 seasons to get 354 wins. Does that make Ryan any less of a HOF'er?



The term "stat accumulator" is ridiculous, when used to argue that a payer should not be in the HOF. Stats are stats. You reach a certain number (300 W's, 500 hr's, 3000 hit's) and you are, SHOULD BE, in. No matter how many years it takes you to do it. Period.

[legaleagle92481]

Now and until the day I pass, I will laugh at the phrase "stat accumulator".

Isn't that what every player does? They accumulate stats over their career. Whether it be 5 yrs or 25 yrs. Some players are gifted enough to amass certain numbers in 15-18 yr careers, while it may take another player 22 years to amass near identical numbers.

What's the difference? Really.


Is Rickey not worthy of 3000 hits because it took him 25 or so years?

Would Biggio had made the HOF without 3000 hits, that took him 18 years to get?

Is Nolan Ryan's 5,714 K's any less impressive even though it took him 27 seasons to amass those? In which he ONLY won 324 games in that same time.

Clemens took 24 seasons to get 354 wins. Does that make Ryan any less of a HOF'er?



The term "stat accumulator" is ridiculous, when used to argue that a payer should not be in the HOF. Stats are stats. You reach a certain number (300 W's, 500 hr's, 3000 hit's) and you are, SHOULD BE, in. No matter how many years it takes you to do it. Period.

To clarify I use the term "stat accumulator" to refer to a player who was not a dominant, best at his position type player whose candidacy is based on very good numbers accumulated over a long career but who fell short of a magic number milestone like 300 wins or 500 homers. Bert B. is the prime example of this. When he pitched did anyone really and honestly view him as one of the best pitchers in baseball or more importantly as a guy who would be in the Hall someday? Or is it just now years after he threw his last pitch the numbers he accumulated over a very long career statheads are just using to justify why he should be in the Hall? In my opinion it is the later. If he had reached 300 wins I would say put him in but he did not and since he was not one of the best pitchers of his era he should stay out. Was he really better than Tommy John or Jim Kaat two guys who also had long careers with many wins but fell short of 300 and were not among the best pitchers in baseball when they played? Was he as good as Jack Morris, the undisputed ace of three world series winning teams and the best pitcher of the 1980's?

[bigtruck260]

Clemens took 24 seasons to get 354 wins. Does that make Ryan any less of a HOF'er?

Totally agree with you about accumulation. In some cases, it means nothing. Clemens did get his wins faster - and he also played for some great teams - while Nolan Ryan was winning 20 games and striking out the entire league while his team was in last place....it's all relative. Both were dominant. No comment on Clemens chances.

As far as Larkin/Smith...Barry was a much better offensive machine. He should be in the Hall - no doubt. Ozzie's greatness came from being the acrobatic figurehead for the speed demon 1980's Cardinals...one of the better teams in franchise history. Ozzie's popularity was HUGE and transcended the game, which in most cases is what the Hall is all about.

He was the number one vote getter in the ASG for years based on his defense alone.