They can't make that argument, because they just spent so much time saying that you can't just consider Jeter and Raines each relative to their own position since they play different positions and different positions have different values. They're not kings of consistency.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 11:40:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/23/2016 11:38:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 11:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/23/2016 8:43:00 AM (view original):
Mussina is not a top 30 all-time pitcher.

Counterpoint, he is.

And I'd rank him ahead of Rivera.

Very convincing arguzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Did you see another clit?

BL- 2 Mikewrg - 0

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/23/2016 1:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Got_Worms on 12/23/2016 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 12:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/23/2016 12:01:00 PM (view original):
There really is a disconnect somewhere. Maybe it's because BL doesn't see value in winning.

Because, if he does, there is no question that Rivera was far more valuable during the Yankees' WS runs than anyone else on the team.

I'd disagree that Rivera was the most valuable player on those teams.

I'm expecting Rivera to receive an extremely high voting percentage when he appears on the ballot, like over 95%. Rivera is a much better HOF candidate than Mussina, and it's not really close!

That's because of comparison to other relievers - which is how it should be. He was the greatest of all time at his position, he should be in.

But that does not mean he was more valuable than Mussina over the course of his career. Mussina is getting mediocre voting support because he's a Top 50 all-time pitcher - not because he was "worse" than Rivera.

Again, if Mariano is such a for-sure HoFer, you gotta include Hoffman. You know, the other 600 save closer with an even higher save% than Rivera

No, not really. Rivera and Hoffman aren't even close. Plus, add in Rivera's post-season numbers and the gap between the two is even bigger.

Posted by d_rock97 on 12/23/2016 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/23/2016 1:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Got_Worms on 12/23/2016 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 12:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/23/2016 12:01:00 PM (view original):
There really is a disconnect somewhere. Maybe it's because BL doesn't see value in winning.

Because, if he does, there is no question that Rivera was far more valuable during the Yankees' WS runs than anyone else on the team.

I'd disagree that Rivera was the most valuable player on those teams.

I'm expecting Rivera to receive an extremely high voting percentage when he appears on the ballot, like over 95%. Rivera is a much better HOF candidate than Mussina, and it's not really close!

That's because of comparison to other relievers - which is how it should be. He was the greatest of all time at his position, he should be in.

But that does not mean he was more valuable than Mussina over the course of his career. Mussina is getting mediocre voting support because he's a Top 50 all-time pitcher - not because he was "worse" than Rivera.

Again, if Mariano is such a for-sure HoFer, you gotta include Hoffman. You know, the other 600 save closer with an even higher save% than Rivera

Well, yeah, if you're retarded.

Are you retarded?

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/24/2016 2:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by d_rock97 on 12/23/2016 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/23/2016 1:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Got_Worms on 12/23/2016 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 12:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/23/2016 12:01:00 PM (view original):
There really is a disconnect somewhere. Maybe it's because BL doesn't see value in winning.

Because, if he does, there is no question that Rivera was far more valuable during the Yankees' WS runs than anyone else on the team.

I'd disagree that Rivera was the most valuable player on those teams.

I'm expecting Rivera to receive an extremely high voting percentage when he appears on the ballot, like over 95%. Rivera is a much better HOF candidate than Mussina, and it's not really close!

That's because of comparison to other relievers - which is how it should be. He was the greatest of all time at his position, he should be in.

But that does not mean he was more valuable than Mussina over the course of his career. Mussina is getting mediocre voting support because he's a Top 50 all-time pitcher - not because he was "worse" than Rivera.

Again, if Mariano is such a for-sure HoFer, you gotta include Hoffman. You know, the other 600 save closer with an even higher save% than Rivera

Well, yeah, if you're retarded.

Are you retarded?

Nah fam, you're the retarded one, you voted no for Matt Stairs HoF

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 12:39:00 AM (view original):
No, not really. Rivera and Hoffman aren't even close. Plus, add in Rivera's post-season numbers and the gap between the two is even bigger.

Who gives a damn? Ruth and Aaron aren't close - does that mean Aaron shouldn't be in? The point is, if you're going to let Rivera in, you can't apply some anti-reliever stance to Hoffman. Hoffman is a HOF reliever.

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/24/2016 1:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 12:39:00 AM (view original):
No, not really. Rivera and Hoffman aren't even close. Plus, add in Rivera's post-season numbers and the gap between the two is even bigger.

Who gives a damn? Ruth and Aaron aren't close - does that mean Aaron shouldn't be in? The point is, if you're going to let Rivera in, you can't apply some anti-reliever stance to Hoffman. Hoffman is a HOF reliever.

Did I say that Hoffman doesn't belong?

My comment was is response to "If you put Rivera in, you HAVE to put Hoffman in". As if they're virtually identical. They're not. Rivera is well ahead of Hoffman in all the numbers. Inclusion of Rivera does not infer an automatic inclusion of Hoffman.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 3:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/24/2016 1:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 12:39:00 AM (view original):
No, not really. Rivera and Hoffman aren't even close. Plus, add in Rivera's post-season numbers and the gap between the two is even bigger.

Who gives a damn? Ruth and Aaron aren't close - does that mean Aaron shouldn't be in? The point is, if you're going to let Rivera in, you can't apply some anti-reliever stance to Hoffman. Hoffman is a HOF reliever.

Did I say that Hoffman doesn't belong?

My comment was is response to "If you put Rivera in, you HAVE to put Hoffman in". As if they're virtually identical. They're not. Rivera is well ahead of Hoffman in all the numbers. Inclusion of Rivera does not infer an automatic inclusion of Hoffman.

They're like 1 & 2 as in the best relievers of all time.

You HAVE to have Hoffman in if you have Rivera in there as well

Posted by d_rock97 on 12/24/2016 5:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 3:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/24/2016 1:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 12:39:00 AM (view original):
No, not really. Rivera and Hoffman aren't even close. Plus, add in Rivera's post-season numbers and the gap between the two is even bigger.

Who gives a damn? Ruth and Aaron aren't close - does that mean Aaron shouldn't be in? The point is, if you're going to let Rivera in, you can't apply some anti-reliever stance to Hoffman. Hoffman is a HOF reliever.

Did I say that Hoffman doesn't belong?

My comment was is response to "If you put Rivera in, you HAVE to put Hoffman in". As if they're virtually identical. They're not. Rivera is well ahead of Hoffman in all the numbers. Inclusion of Rivera does not infer an automatic inclusion of Hoffman.

They're like 1 & 2 as in the best relievers of all time.

You HAVE to have Hoffman in if you have Rivera in there as well

Well, yeah, if you're retarded.

Are you retarded?

Posted by d_rock97 on 12/24/2016 5:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 3:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/24/2016 1:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 12:39:00 AM (view original):
No, not really. Rivera and Hoffman aren't even close. Plus, add in Rivera's post-season numbers and the gap between the two is even bigger.

Who gives a damn? Ruth and Aaron aren't close - does that mean Aaron shouldn't be in? The point is, if you're going to let Rivera in, you can't apply some anti-reliever stance to Hoffman. Hoffman is a HOF reliever.

Did I say that Hoffman doesn't belong?

My comment was is response to "If you put Rivera in, you HAVE to put Hoffman in". As if they're virtually identical. They're not. Rivera is well ahead of Hoffman in all the numbers. Inclusion of Rivera does not infer an automatic inclusion of Hoffman.

They're like 1 & 2 as in the best relievers of all time.

You HAVE to have Hoffman in if you have Rivera in there as well

Actually, you don't. Because Rivera is #1 of all time. And even if you want to consider Hoffman as the #2 all time, he's a distant second. That's how good Rivera was compared to all other relievers in the history of MLB.

I'm pretty sure drock is the retarded bastard son of BL. Probably inbreeding or something.

Merry Christmas to all!

I hope MikeT has his lifelong dream of the entire Yankees roster running a train on his ***.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 5:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by d_rock97 on 12/24/2016 5:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 3:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/24/2016 1:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/24/2016 12:39:00 AM (view original):
No, not really. Rivera and Hoffman aren't even close. Plus, add in Rivera's post-season numbers and the gap between the two is even bigger.

Who gives a damn? Ruth and Aaron aren't close - does that mean Aaron shouldn't be in? The point is, if you're going to let Rivera in, you can't apply some anti-reliever stance to Hoffman. Hoffman is a HOF reliever.

Did I say that Hoffman doesn't belong?

My comment was is response to "If you put Rivera in, you HAVE to put Hoffman in". As if they're virtually identical. They're not. Rivera is well ahead of Hoffman in all the numbers. Inclusion of Rivera does not infer an automatic inclusion of Hoffman.

They're like 1 & 2 as in the best relievers of all time.

You HAVE to have Hoffman in if you have Rivera in there as well

Actually, you don't. Because Rivera is #1 of all time. And even if you want to consider Hoffman as the #2 all time, he's a distant second. That's how good Rivera was compared to all other relievers in the history of MLB.

The point is, if you're including Rivera, you clearly don't have a "NO RELIEVERS!" stance (which is good). And the only argument anyone could have against Hoffman's inclusion is if they have a "NO RELIEVERS!" stance.

So yes, if you're willing to elect Rivera, there is zero reason not to elect Hoffman. Even if he's a "distant" second to Rivera, he's also well up on the next closest reliever behind him.

Context is also important.

There are already a handful of relievers in the HOF. All were clearly "revolutionary", or at least, the dominant RP's of their era.

Hoffman was neither.

Again, my argument is not that he doesn't belong in the HOF. I'm just challenging the idea of "If Rivera, then also Hoffman". I just don't see that correlation.