Posted by burnsy483 on 12/10/2013 2:30:00 PM (view original):
I'd like to see the standard raised. The Hall of Fame should be the best of the best. Not this guy:
Does that look like a HOFer to you? He shouldn't be.
IMO, by allowing Halladay in, you're lowering the standard. Since you don't feel like reading to understand my argument, I'll repeat it. If you don't have the typical HOF length career (he clearly doesn't) to put up the counting stats (wins, WAR, Ks, etc) then you better have a dominant peak. Relative to his peers, IMO, it's not dominant. Dominant is Pedro. Pedro should get in, despite not having a large amount of innings.
And for what it's worth, Jaffe is torn on Halladay. He also wants the standard raised.
Why you're bringing up Red Faber I have no idea. He is well below Halladay in the Jaffe charts. And in general, you can't build a Hall of Fame case by comparing just one guy to another. That's incredibly reductive. You can make a one-to-one comparison say anything you want. I could say that Bret Saberhagen should be in because he's better than Chief Bender. I could say Jim Palmer shouldn't be in because he has lower JAWS numbers than some 1800s guy named Charlie Buffinton who isn't in the Hall. One person is never the standard -- the standards are the standard.
Martinez was perhaps the most dominant during those years than anyone has ever been in history. That's an impossible standard, one that will leave you with maybe 20 pitchers in the Hall.
I disagree with Jaffe, for reasons I've already mentioned -- insisting every Hall of Famer be above the Hall of Fame average is a ridiculously high standard for current players. That said, I very much like the tool he created.
Now I really gotta go -- thanks for the discussion.