All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Pitchers in the Hall
12/10/2013 10:59 AM
Sure, I was just providing context with the 8000 number. I agree that there are a handful of guys that would be out if we started over. There are dead ball era guys that only pitched 6 seasons, guys like Gomez and Hunter who clearly weren't good enough, Dean who didn't pitch enough, etc.
12/10/2013 11:09 AM
But 8k is misleading.   Surely 1% deserve to be in the HOF, right?   If you're in the top 1% of your profession, you're fantastic at your job.    However, only 425 threw 2000 IP.   1% of that is less than 5.
12/10/2013 11:25 AM
it doesnt have to be in the top 1% of guys who threw 2000 innings. but maybe one has to throw 2000 innings to have enough of a resume to be considered in the top 1%. 

if youre in the top 1% of your profession, you likely have some sort of track record that backs that up.
12/10/2013 11:26 AM
???
12/10/2013 11:44 AM (edited)
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/10/2013 11:09:00 AM (view original):
But 8k is misleading.   Surely 1% deserve to be in the HOF, right?   If you're in the top 1% of your profession, you're fantastic at your job.    However, only 425 threw 2000 IP.   1% of that is less than 5.
I never said anything about 1%. 8000 is just the number who have pitched (it's actually more, BR's play index only goes back to 1916).

I voted for the 50-80 range. Some guys - Fingers, Sutter, Dean, Cummings, Gomez, Hunter, and a few others get tossed out on their *****. Guys who were clearly better than those 6 -  Schilling, Mussina, Glavine, maybe a couple others - go in.

The standards for the Hall of Fame go up even thought the overall number stays about the same.

12/10/2013 11:37 AM
i was doing too many things..my bad-- i was just sayint that 8k isnt misleading
.  
anyways, it doesnt matter how many guys are in the hall of fame as a percentage of guys played.    its the hall of FAME.  not the hall of excellence.  if a guy was really well known and will draw people to Cooperstown, NY to see his induction and than again to learn more about him and people like him, then put him in.  the purpose of the hall of fame is to maintain the stories of players and other contributors to the game so that future generations can learn about them and appreciate them.  if you visit the hall of fame, you are most likely a fan of baseball.  if youre a fan of baseball, then why wouldnt you want to learn and see as much about as many great players as possible?

ii think its silly that some people think that the hall of fame is some sanctuary that has to be protected from players who were merely very good rather than excellent.  in this case, i think more inclusive is better than less inclusive.
12/10/2013 11:54 AM
OK, I must be speaking Arabic or something.

When a post is started with "8000 have....", it leads one to believe it's a big number.   When the poll gives "80+" as an option, the automatic assumption is 1%.   I brought up 1% because that's simple math.   And top 1% is certainly worthy of being acknowledged as far above the norm, way above the average.   Which, in this case, would be HOF-worthy.

As for the purpose of the HOF, I think it's there to "reward" the best of the best.  Mark Fidrych was fantastic.   Dude was the best pitcher(or at the top) his rookie year.   Talked to ball, manicured the mound on his hands and knees, had crazy hair.   Died by getting crushed by a truck.   Great story from start to finish.  Certainly not HOF-worthy even though I'd love to read more stories about him and the like.  That's why I wouldn't wasnt to see and learn as much about as many players as possible in the HALL OF FAME.   I can look 'em up on the internet.   At the HOF, I want to read about the absolute best.
12/10/2013 12:01 PM
You assumed incorrectly. 80+ was just to represent a bigger hall than we have now. As in, "I know there are already 60+ pitchers in the hall, but at least 20 more are deserving."
12/10/2013 12:12 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/10/2013 8:35:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 12/9/2013 8:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/9/2013 8:23:00 PM (view original):
Maybe, rather than say "We need this many because this many has pitcherd!!", we could say "Let's put worthy pitchers in the HOF."

Just a thought.
How do we determine who is and isn't worthy? A Hall derived from an eligible population of 50 is going to look different than one derived from 100,000 eligible players.
Best of the best.  Kind of what an accomplishment like the HOF should be.  

With all-star teams you have a specific roster size and the ol' all teams must be represented requirement.    Not so with the HOF.   There's doesn't have to be a specific number or percentage. 
Was it you once upon a time who suggested a HOF of 25 hitters and 25 pitchers, and every time someone is inducted, the worst of the 25 gets removed?
12/10/2013 12:12 PM
The Fidrych example is fair Mike.  I dont think anyone is advocating for "Let's put everyone who ever played in the Hall of Fame."   However, wouldnt the hall be a more fun place to visit and see if there was more information about more great players?  Why does it diminsh the accomplishments of Walter Johnson or Christy Mathewson if Bruce Sutter and Rollie Fingers are in the Hall of Fame?  Also, can you not read about the guys who are the best of the best on the internet ws well?  If that's the criteria, why bother having a hall of fame?
12/10/2013 12:13 PM
Fair enough.   I just know how you manipulate numbers to suit your argument so I assumed, obviously incorrectly, that you have voted 80+ and would use the "So not even 1%?" argument.
12/10/2013 12:15 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/10/2013 12:13:00 PM (view original):
Fair enough.   I just know how you manipulate numbers to suit your argument so I assumed, obviously incorrectly, that you have voted 80+ and would use the "So not even 1%?" argument.
I voted 50-80.
12/10/2013 12:17 PM
Posted by loudawg10 on 12/10/2013 12:13:00 PM (view original):
The Fidrych example is fair Mike.  I dont think anyone is advocating for "Let's put everyone who ever played in the Hall of Fame."   However, wouldnt the hall be a more fun place to visit and see if there was more information about more great players?  Why does it diminsh the accomplishments of Walter Johnson or Christy Mathewson if Bruce Sutter and Rollie Fingers are in the Hall of Fame?  Also, can you not read about the guys who are the best of the best on the internet ws well?  If that's the criteria, why bother having a hall of fame?
To recognize the best of the best.    As I said, it feels like a "reward" for a great career.   Maybe I'm looking at the HOF as a monument for great players as opposed to an entertaining showcase for the fans.

FWIW, I looked up Super Joe Charboneau right after the Fidrych post.   Another great story of a failed career.
12/10/2013 12:20 PM
There are a couple problems with the current Hall:

1) Back in the day, voters didn't look at stats nearly as much. They looked at character, reputation, contribution to the game, loyalty, etc. That watered things down a bit, so now you have people saying "well, Player X is in and Player Y is better, therefore Player Y is a HOFer". Which leads to the second problem...

2) Comparing across eras. What a guy did and meant to the game back in 1940 may not be of any value today or vice versa. And thanks to the Steroid Era, benchmarks went out the window. Certain things like 500 HR are no longer a lock to get you in. 400 HRs in the 70s was a lot more impressive than 500 HRs. today.

of 2
All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Pitchers in the Hall

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.