Current players - HOF

[hche]

As baseball evolves, starting pithcers don't go 9IP everygame anymore. So closers become a big part of the game. What's the problem in putting the best closer of the game into the HOF?

I would put these current players in if they end their career right now:
Ichiro
Pujols
Jeter
Cabrera
Thome
Chipper
Rivera

[Tom Oates]

According to the baseball Hall of Fame web site. "They shall be chosen on the basis of playing ability, sportsmanship, character, their contribution to the teams on which they played and to baseball in general."

Based on this statement, Here is how I would decide...

[mcgoo2]

Originally Posted by Tom Oates

According to the baseball Hall of Fame web site. "They shall be chosen on the basis of playing ability, sportsmanship, character, their contribution to the teams on which they played and to baseball in general."

Based on this statement, Here is how I would decide...

So ability is just as relevant as character? Should Ty Cobb be in the HOF?

[mcgoo2]

Originally Posted by DarkTiger29

I fail to understand your logic. Why would Sosa and McGwire not be allowed in but A-rod would? Didn't Alex admit that he took steroids...Isn't that admitting he cheated?

Cheating is cheating. If Pete Rose isn't going to be allowed in (even though it's different circumstances) then A-Rod, McGwire, Sosa, and most def not Bonds should be allowed in. There are more and these just name a few but play the game the right way.

In terms of McGwire and Sosa, I think judging players based on their contemporaries is a better way to measure this era. Bonds, Clemens and possibly A-Rod dominated the league much more so than McGwire and Sosa. I just personally think that those who have used PEDs will/should be scrutinized more heavily than someone who did it cleanly. In order to make the HOF in the steroid era, one has to truly dominate. 600+ homeruns doesn't diminish the achievement in the past but it sure does diminish the achievement in the steroid era.

I think Pete Rose should be in the HOF as well.

[Zoop]

Ichiro
Mariano Rivera
Derek Jeter
Albert Pujols
Roy Halladay
Jim Thome
Miguel Cabrera
Todd Helton
Justin Verlander
David Wright

Didn't include Omar and Chipper because they will be in the Hall and retired this year.

[mfw13]

Originally Posted by maxe0213

You my friend need to watch some baseball if you believe that Mo doesn't deserve to be in after being one of the most dominate PLAYERS of his time.

My point isn't the he wasn't dominant....he clearly is/was.

My point is that closers don't pitch often enough to truly have a serious impact on their team's success.

Teams play about 1500 innings per season. A closer only pitches in about 60 of them, almost always entering the game with a lead and the bases empty. A majority of the time a closer enters with a two or three run lead, meaning that even if they concede a run, they still get a save. The fact that Rivera, the best closer in history, earned his team an average of only 3 more wins per season than a replacement player tells you how little impact closers really have.

Closers are overrated. Period. Even the greatest in the game.

[VeedonFleece]

Originally Posted by mfw13

Closers are overrated. Period. Even the greatest in the game.

Spot on. I'd still put this particular one in though.

I hate the Yankees btw. But, as someone pointed out earlier, roles have changed. He's been the best, by some margin.

[duwal]

I don't see how anyone can think CC will get into the hall of fame unless we are basing it on wins alone. The guy has had one season in his entire career where his ERA was under 3.00 for the season. A cereer ERA of 3.50. Post-season his ERA is over 4.50 in 19 starts and just 107 innings!! Nothing at all has screamed out elite or hall of fame worthy pitcher

[shadymccoy25]

Ichiro should be on that list for sure. It is not called the MLB hall of fame. Ichiro has amassed over 4500 hits in his career both in Japan and the US. He should be a lock for the Professional Baseball Hall of Fame. The problem is that the writers will only look at his MLB numbers which are pretty damn good I may say.

[duwal]

Originally Posted by Tom Oates

According to the baseball Hall of Fame web site. "They shall be chosen on the basis of playing ability, sportsmanship, character, their contribution to the teams on which they played and to baseball in general."

Based on this statement, Here is how I would decide...

if that truly was the guidelines than several of the current players in the hall of fame need to be kicked out

[lobo_hacker]

Originally Posted by mfw13

My point isn't the he wasn't dominant....he clearly is/was.

My point is that closers don't pitch often enough to truly have a serious impact on their team's success.

Teams play about 1500 innings per season. A closer only pitches in about 60 of them, almost always entering the game with a lead and the bases empty. A majority of the time a closer enters with a two or three run lead, meaning that even if they concede a run, they still get a save. The fact that Rivera, the best closer in history, earned his team an average of only 3 more wins per season than a replacement player tells you how little impact closers really have.

Closers are overrated. Period. Even the greatest in the game.

-Sorta-short, lazy reply while waiting for the wife to get outta the bathroom: I don't agree that Closers are over-rated. I would say, though, that Saves are over-rated, and managers suck at using their closers int he current era.

Without derailing the thread too much, the two main reasons closers aren't being used properly are money and perception. If the closer doesn't get saves or a low ERA in those 1-inning jaunts, their payday on contract years diminishes. And thanks to Beane/LaRussa, a manager would be publicly questioned by the masses and his/her owners if they used their 'closer' in atypical situations.

Managers need to be better than that. To sum up, i don't think Closers are over-rated, just mishandled. Their job is necessary, and even a 1-3% increase in efficiency can win some games. For the saber-heads out there, take a look at Leverage Indexes and send nasty letters to your hometown team to do a better job of managing those situations using their best bullpen arms.

lobo_hacker

[DarkTiger29]

See my view is I don't care if they dominated the league...they didn't do it on their own. They relied on enlarging their heads and shrinking their balls.

I've said this since the beginning of the whole Bonds thing...The guy was/is an ass. Sure he hit the ball but at his age, there is no way he should have looked the way he did or had as much power as he did. Steroids don't help you hit the ball but they will add some distance to your fly balls.
Bonds honestly doesn't understand why people are hating on him or what he did wrong. It's pathetic that he knew the only way he could "be better" than everybody else was to cheat. He would have been remembered as a great player if he wouldn't have juiced...now as far as I'm concerned he'll just be another * next to records

[californiakron]

I've always had doubts about Thome being completely clean throughout his career. It is my personal opinion, and I can't prove anything so no need to flame.

There were several known steroid users on the Cleveland Indians teams in the early to mid 90's ( Manny Ramirez, Albert Belle, Jason Grimsley, David Bell).

Anyone who hit's 600+ home runs in the steroid era will make me think twice if all their numbers are legit.

It will be interesting to see who is elected and who is left out in the next few years.

[Tom Oates]

Originally Posted by mcgoo2

So ability is just as relevant as character? Should Ty Cobb be in the HOF?

I've read a few books about Cobb. He was by many accounts a racist, mean, nasty, dirty player, etc. he too would fail in the sportsmanship and character categories. This is actually a great parallel and could be an entire topic by itself.

Cobb played dirty and cheated but cheating was common when there was a single umpire. Runners going from first to third across the middle of the infield as an example. Racism was common in society and baseball was segregated at the time. You could debate that amphetamines and steroids were/are common in the modern era. So... If some people get into the HOF even though they clearly failed in some of these categories... Do we simply ignore these requirements altogether and vote for people based solely on statistics? If that's the case, throw out the voting altogether and simply state that meeting a certain threshold for HR, Hits, RBI, Wins, Strikeouts, etc stamps your entry.

I like these MSG boards but I sure would like to sit down and have a beer with some of you guys and discuss this angle. Cobb, Rose, and I'm sure many others had character flaws that would call into question whether they meet the spirit of the guidelines.

Since Cobb was in the inaugural HOF class, they pretty much called the sportsmanship and character requirements into question right out of the gate.

Tom