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.

[justinwc80]

If Barry Larkin doesn't make it in it will be a travesty. Greater than Ozzie Smith!

[tjm5711]

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.

I'm primarily a Cub fan, and I watched many of Andre Dawson's years with them. Granted I didn't see his earlier years with the Expos before his knees got bad. but, I look at his numbers and just don't see why he should be in. I think the fact that there are so many guys in the 500 home run club now, and that he didn't come close to that hurts him a lot. Also the fact he did absolutely nothing in the post season and has no WS rings, you have to rely heavily on his stats. Other than his 1987 MVP year, and his early stolen base numbers, nothing really separates him. He was a career .279 hitter, and he never really combined any serious power numbers with those great stolen base totals. Anyways, I'd love for somebody to make a good argument for why he should so emphatically be in. The only two I see that truly deserve to be in are :

>Barry Larkin
>Jack Morris

Both put up great numbers and were on some of the greatest teams of their era !