Again the game and criteria of greatness has changed. If you want to use the old criteria no starting pitchers will ever get in again because they have not won 300 games or pitched as many innings as the greatest of all time.

The question should be were they one of the greatest of their era.

Note 20 - 2B in hall Utleys career slugging pct ranks 8th!
81 Pitchers in the hall Scillings career wins ranks 52 right behind Pedro

The criteria shouldn’t change...It supposed to be greatness...Maddux, Glavine and Johnson all notched their three hundred wins in the 2000’s...The Hall is for those guys...Not the guys who win 217 after they played 19 seasons...
Did you really ever consider Scott Rolen And Chase Utley
as one of the greatest players during their era?

If Rolen and Schilling don’t belong as well as utley and Rollins there are plenty you have to take out of the hall of fame.....many

Posted by Lewb on 1/24/2021 10:10:00 PM (view original):
Santo, Rolen, Schilling, Rollins, Utley are not amongst the greatest players of all time...It ridiculous to even consider them hall-worthy...

This statement is true, I think. Though I do favor Santo's inclusion. And as to the "cheater's" issue.
HOW do you draw the line?
Once anyone with a taint gets in the whole shebang becomes too murky for value.
We already have "cheater's" in the Hall.
How the hell do you keep the game's best (and most feared for many seasons!) hitter out of the Hall??
It's ridiculous that Pete Rose and Barry Bonds are NOT in the Hall of Fame.
It renders the whole Hall as bogus!

The Hall of Fame should be limited to the very best AND should be determined by play ON THE FIELD!!
Nothing else should matter.
Not even a few big games pitched marvelously.

Posted by dino27 on 1/25/2021 1:18:00 AM (view original):
If Rolen and Schilling don’t belong as well as utley and Rollins there are plenty you have to take out of the hall of fame.....many

This is likely true Dino, but HOW? That's the trouble, once they're in, they're in!
Mistakes have been made in the past. You don't use past mistakes to justify a current mistake, do you?
Putting more marginal players in the Hall is clearly just making it worse!

The standards have indeed been lowered...There is no way on God’s green earth that any of you guys, when asked, ever mentioned Rollins, Utley, Schilling as the greatest players of their era while they were playing...Griffey Jr., yes, Scott Rolen, preposterous..l

"The idea that the HOF is only for 300 game winners, or players in the Ruth-Gehrig-Mays stratosphere, that was long gone by the mid-1940s."

Then, if so, How can you still call it the Hall of FAME? Has it evolved to just the most popular players of each era?
Reckon so. And it's gonna end up being so crowded that inclusion is not so meaningful. Kind of like a Medal of Freedom award given by trump.
Apologies to Lou Holtz but I'm with Bellichick on that one.
Reckon I wouldn't have wanted it.

Rube Marquard got in for telling some entertaining whoppers to Lawrence "Glory of Their Times" Ritter while the tape was rolling. Now who's the rube, ha ha.

As Bob said, though, just because players nobody really remembers now got in in past decades doesn't mean we have to use those names as a bar. I think Utley and Rolen probably belong, at least Utley. I can't see Rollins, he was never even close to being the best shortstop in baseball at any point in his career. That seems like a huge red flag. And I feel the same way about Schilling. He overlapped fairly neatly with Maddux, Clemens, Pedro, and Randy Johnson, all of whom are clearly ahead of him. I'd put Smoltz ahead of him, though I'm sure others would argue that. I think that's more than enough SP for one era.

I never hear anyone arguing for Kevin Brown in the HOF. Ever. But HOF-credentials-wise I think Kevin Brown and Curt Schilling are virtually inseparable. If KB doesn't merit serious discussion, there's no way Schilling should be in.

It appears kinda clear. The Hall has been "imperfect" to say the very LEAST for a long long time. Dahs point regarding Kevin Brown is spot on. And many could name other examples equally as weighty as Brown Vs. Schilling. My main point is that the more you populate the so-called "Hall of Fame" with the playing ability level exemplified by Contrarian's impactful list (hard to argue vs. THAT) and guys like Rolen, Rollins, or Schilling..............eventually you reach a point that it becomes kinda pointless.............ESPECIALLY IF the same so-called BASEBALL HALL OF FAME does NOT include Pete Rose or Barry Bonds because of some matter OFF the field of play.

It renders the Hall of Fame irrelevant and kinda stupid!

Posted by dahsdebater on 1/25/2021 11:07:00 AM (view original):
As Bob said, though, just because players nobody really remembers now got in in past decades doesn't mean we have to use those names as a bar. I think Utley and Rolen probably belong, at least Utley. I can't see Rollins, he was never even close to being the best shortstop in baseball at any point in his career. That seems like a huge red flag. And I feel the same way about Schilling. He overlapped fairly neatly with Maddux, Clemens, Pedro, and Randy Johnson, all of whom are clearly ahead of him. I'd put Smoltz ahead of him, though I'm sure others would argue that. I think that's more than enough SP for one era.

I never hear anyone arguing for Kevin Brown in the HOF. Ever. But HOF-credentials-wise I think Kevin Brown and Curt Schilling are virtually inseparable. If KB doesn't merit serious discussion, there's no way Schilling should be in.

Nah .. Schilling has almost 20% more WAR than KB (per BBREF) and has a much better showing in the post season than Brown. You can argue that shouldn't matter but it clearly does

Posted by Lewb on 1/25/2021 10:00:00 AM (view original):
The standards have indeed been lowered...There is no way on God’s green earth that any of you guys, when asked, ever mentioned Rollins, Utley, Schilling as the greatest players of their era while they were playing...Griffey Jr., yes, Scott Rolen, preposterous..l

Nobody talks about third baseman for hall of fame because mot many really good careers from them like outfielders and first base and even second base.
I font agree that Rolen wasn’t cited for his greatness while playing. He was always compared to mike Schmidt.

Only a few guys get in anyway each year and remember there are so many more teams in baseball since expansion.
and now relievers are allowed in and still never more then a few get in.
this year it will be one or two.

Compared to last year schilling is a net vote down.
I still think he sneaks in but if so only him. Rolen will get closer but not yet.