HOF vote tracker Topic

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/5/2014 5:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Jtpsops on 1/5/2014 5:13:00 PM (view original):
So wait...now the HOF is for those with the best work ethic?

And I guarantee I'm 5x as active as your fat ***.
As expected, you missed the point.

If you can train for one specific skill, you should become very proficient at it.   If you have to train for two or more, something has to suffer.

I can guarantee you are not.   And you're ridiculously dumb to boot.
No, I didn't miss the point. You just can't seem to read what you yourself write. You just implied that we should be voting for guys who had to work harder/train more. I don't give a damn if a guy has to train 40 hours a week to be decent. He's not as good as another guy who works only 20 hours a week to be great.

Thomas was a better hitter than Piazza and NO ONE is voting Piazza into the hall for his defense, even if it wasn't as bad as it is reputed to be. If Piazza gets in, it will be for his bat. So if Thomas and Edgar were better hitters (and they were, by far), they should be in as well.

1/5/2014 7:53 PM
Yeah, you're too stupid to get the point.  
1/6/2014 8:38 AM
LOL @ jtpoops
1/6/2014 8:59 AM
Posted by Jtpsops on 1/4/2014 11:01:00 AM (view original):
How can there be a consensus on PED players? It's a moral issue. Even if the HOF says, "Ya, it's fine, we don't care if you elect them. Focus on what they did on the field," voters aren't suddenly going to say "That's a relief. Put 'em in!" They have the freedom to do so now and they're not, so unless the HOF mandates it (which defeats the purpose of voters), a consensus is hardly possible.
That's pretty much my point - I said in my original post it wasn't likely to happen.   My point is that people are calling for structural changes to the system (which certainly isn't perfect) when the main breaking point right now isn't structural, it's ideological.  Unless you specifically hand pick a voting base based on a desired outcome on PED players, there's no system in which Bonds, Clemens, and company are getting in any time soon. And as long as they have a large block of support, it's going to also create a drag on the chances of others in any system as well.
1/6/2014 9:15 AM
Posted by Got_Worms on 1/4/2014 2:06:00 PM (view original):
"And I'd like to assume no one tossing those guys a token vote was leaving someone off their ballot that they really thought was deserving to do it, so it's probably a net gain of nothing."

This is not a safe assumption about the BBWAA HOF voters.  I wish they would make all HOF ballots public so we can see what moron's are voting for the Aaron Sele's & Jim Deshaies of the world.  At least ESPN's Pedro Gomez admitted voting for Jay Bell...
A lot of times they do come out and say - it's almost invariably a writer throwing a bone to a guy he covered for most of his career.  It's silly to me, but as long as they aren't filling up the ballot, it's completely inconsequential.   And while I don't have high regards for a lot of writers, like I said, last year the average was only around 6 votes per ballot - so the odds are pretty good that none of those kind of votes were done at the expense of a legit candidate.  And even if some of them were, the number of votes are so small as to be inconsequential to the process.

Like I said, I understand why keeping these guys off the ballot would make you feel better based on the principle, but it wouldn't have any actual impact on the process.

1/6/2014 9:23 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 1/6/2014 8:38:00 AM (view original):
Yeah, you're too stupid to get the point.  

Aren't you guys berating bad_luck for this debate tactic in another thread?

You clearly made a post saying "Duh, which guy has to work harder/train more?". That implies we should vote for someone based on their work ethic. So what if Piazza had to work on defense and Thomas didn't. Piazza wasn't a good defender, so what good did that extra work do?

I'll say it again, since you're such a fat, illiterate piece of trailer trash - Piazza is not getting any votes for his defense. He'll get votes for his offense. Thomas was a better hitter. Therefore, if Piazza is a HOFer, so is Thomas.

And since Thomas currently has 20% more votes than Piazza in published ballots, looks like a lot more voters agree with me than you. Dumbass.

1/6/2014 11:41 PM
Generally I look at guys relative to their position when determining how good they were.  The greatest hitting catcher of all time should easily be a HOFer.  To do what he did offensively, while playing catcher, is ridiculous.  There is a reason why you don't see catchers put up offensive numbers like 1st basemen do.

Also, aside from his throwing arm, I'd say Piazza was good to above-average behind the plate.  Pitchers loved to throw to him.  Coming from someone who watched a shitton of his games.

And to the guy who asked why I thought it was interesting that Piazza wasn't getting votes that Thomas did, it's because Piazza isn't getting votes because he looks like a roider.  I don't understand the difference between what Piazza looks like and what Thomas looks like.
1/7/2014 1:26 PM
well someone didn't vote for maddux - just caught the end of it on mlb network - not sure who it was - only voted for Morris saying that he will never vote for anyone in the steroid era ; pitcher or hitter.
1/7/2014 1:42 PM
Posted by Tdiddy on 1/7/2014 1:42:00 PM (view original):
well someone didn't vote for maddux - just caught the end of it on mlb network - not sure who it was - only voted for Morris saying that he will never vote for anyone in the steroid era ; pitcher or hitter.
Good thing Morris didn't wait to retire until after the 1994 season. No steroid era over lap there. Nope, none at all.

The voter's name is Gurnick. He's an idiot.
1/7/2014 2:01 PM
I just saw that - mlb.com release its voters' ballots. Gurnick only voted for Morris.
1/7/2014 2:15 PM
I'll give him some props for publicizing his ballot, but how do these guys look at themselves in the mirror? How can someone consider themselves knowledgeable on the game of baseball when they simply paint everyone with the same brush, rather than forming their own opinion on a case-by-case basis?

Guys like this self-righteously appoint themselves protectors of the game, but they actually hurt the game. Maddux will get in regardless, but what if there's a borderline guy who was clean? Then Gurnick is actually robbing the kind of player that he's declared himself trying to protect. It's incredibly ignorant to think because a few used, everyone used.
1/7/2014 2:19 PM
Marty Noble just said he only voted for 3 players because he doesn't think more than 3 should be inducted in a given year. It makes the ceremony less special. That's a new one.
1/7/2014 4:17 PM
Posted by Tdiddy on 1/7/2014 1:42:00 PM (view original):
well someone didn't vote for maddux - just caught the end of it on mlb network - not sure who it was - only voted for Morris saying that he will never vote for anyone in the steroid era ; pitcher or hitter.
1/7/2014 5:03 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Or you do what a fair person would do, and only boycott those whose use has been admitted or proven. That's like saying "Well, Detroit has a high crime rate, so everyone who lives in Detroit is a criminal and I will treat them as such." That's not taking a strong stance against crime - that's just being foolish.
1/7/2014 5:56 PM
◂ Prev 1...3|4|5|6|7...12 Next ▸
HOF vote tracker Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2018 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.