Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 12:20:00 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.

Even more than Tim Raines, who was on the '96 Yankees WS team?

WHOA!!!! That's just crazy talk!

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 11:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 11:50:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/23/2016 11:15:00 AM (view original):
I'm still not sure why you keep bringing Mussina into a discussion about Rivera's HOF worthiness. I'm sure most people would agree Mussina is more HOF worthy than Rivera. But that has nothing to do with whether Rivera should be in or not. As has been stated multiple times, there is room for both.

I just used Mussina as an example. He was better than Rivera. If you think Rivera is a slam dunk, Mussina is too.

Rivera is, or at least will be, a slam dunk when he appears on the ballot.

Mussina, on the other hand, is in his fourth year on the ballot at 43%. Do you consider that a "slam dunk" in your magical world of rainbows and unicorns?

That's my point. The disconnect is in the vote discrepancy between a great relief pitcher and a starter who was more valuable.

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.

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.

Yet another convincing argumezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 12:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 11:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 11:50:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/23/2016 11:15:00 AM (view original):
I'm still not sure why you keep bringing Mussina into a discussion about Rivera's HOF worthiness. I'm sure most people would agree Mussina is more HOF worthy than Rivera. But that has nothing to do with whether Rivera should be in or not. As has been stated multiple times, there is room for both.

I just used Mussina as an example. He was better than Rivera. If you think Rivera is a slam dunk, Mussina is too.

Rivera is, or at least will be, a slam dunk when he appears on the ballot.

Mussina, on the other hand, is in his fourth year on the ballot at 43%. Do you consider that a "slam dunk" in your magical world of rainbows and unicorns?

That's my point. The disconnect is in the vote discrepancy between a great relief pitcher and a starter who was more valuable.

Maybe the disconnect is not with the voters.

Maybe the disconnect is somewhere else.

Where might that disconnect be?

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 12:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 11:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 11:50:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/23/2016 11:15:00 AM (view original):
I'm still not sure why you keep bringing Mussina into a discussion about Rivera's HOF worthiness. I'm sure most people would agree Mussina is more HOF worthy than Rivera. But that has nothing to do with whether Rivera should be in or not. As has been stated multiple times, there is room for both.

I just used Mussina as an example. He was better than Rivera. If you think Rivera is a slam dunk, Mussina is too.

Rivera is, or at least will be, a slam dunk when he appears on the ballot.

Mussina, on the other hand, is in his fourth year on the ballot at 43%. Do you consider that a "slam dunk" in your magical world of rainbows and unicorns?

That's my point. The disconnect is in the vote discrepancy between a great relief pitcher and a starter who was more valuable.

Maybe the disconnect is not with the voters.

Maybe the disconnect is somewhere else.

Where might that disconnect be?

Jeeez, my bad. I forgot about the tec-patented argument, "whatever the voters do is the correct thing." I'll look for your pro-Raines argument next month.

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!

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 12:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 11:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 11:50:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/23/2016 11:15:00 AM (view original):
I'm still not sure why you keep bringing Mussina into a discussion about Rivera's HOF worthiness. I'm sure most people would agree Mussina is more HOF worthy than Rivera. But that has nothing to do with whether Rivera should be in or not. As has been stated multiple times, there is room for both.

I just used Mussina as an example. He was better than Rivera. If you think Rivera is a slam dunk, Mussina is too.

Rivera is, or at least will be, a slam dunk when he appears on the ballot.

Mussina, on the other hand, is in his fourth year on the ballot at 43%. Do you consider that a "slam dunk" in your magical world of rainbows and unicorns?

That's my point. The disconnect is in the vote discrepancy between a great relief pitcher and a starter who was more valuable.

Maybe the disconnect is not with the voters.

Maybe the disconnect is somewhere else.

Where might that disconnect be?

Jeeez, my bad. I forgot about the tec-patented argument, "whatever the voters do is the correct thing." I'll look for your pro-Raines argument next month.

Hmm. Seems I remember somebody recently saying " As much as I criticize HOF voters, they've done a good job."

Now who could that have been?

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.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 1:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 12:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 11:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 11:50:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/23/2016 11:15:00 AM (view original):
I'm still not sure why you keep bringing Mussina into a discussion about Rivera's HOF worthiness. I'm sure most people would agree Mussina is more HOF worthy than Rivera. But that has nothing to do with whether Rivera should be in or not. As has been stated multiple times, there is room for both.

I just used Mussina as an example. He was better than Rivera. If you think Rivera is a slam dunk, Mussina is too.

Rivera is, or at least will be, a slam dunk when he appears on the ballot.

Mussina, on the other hand, is in his fourth year on the ballot at 43%. Do you consider that a "slam dunk" in your magical world of rainbows and unicorns?

That's my point. The disconnect is in the vote discrepancy between a great relief pitcher and a starter who was more valuable.

Maybe the disconnect is not with the voters.

Maybe the disconnect is somewhere else.

Where might that disconnect be?

Jeeez, my bad. I forgot about the tec-patented argument, "whatever the voters do is the correct thing." I'll look for your pro-Raines argument next month.

Hmm. Seems I remember somebody recently saying " As much as I criticize HOF voters, they've done a good job."

Now who could that have been?

I do think they've done a good job but they aren't perfect. Leaving Mussina and Schilling out is a mistake.

Maybe your "expert opinion" of Mussina and Schilling is the mistake (?)

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 1:39:00 PM (view original):
Maybe your "expert opinion" of Mussina and Schilling is the mistake (?)

I'm not above making mistakes, but I'm pretty sure I'm right here.

You think Glavine deserves to be in. He's probably the third best out of him, Mussina, and Schilling.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 1:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 1:39:00 PM (view original):
Maybe your "expert opinion" of Mussina and Schilling is the mistake (?)

I'm not above making mistakes, but I'm pretty sure I'm right here.

You think Glavine deserves to be in. He's probably the third best out of him, Mussina, and Schilling.

PSBL. Insists that he's right when reality shows that he's wrong.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 1:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/23/2016 1:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/23/2016 1:39:00 PM (view original):
Maybe your "expert opinion" of Mussina and Schilling is the mistake (?)

I'm not above making mistakes, but I'm pretty sure I'm right here.

You think Glavine deserves to be in. He's probably the third best out of him, Mussina, and Schilling.

PSBL. Insists that he's right when reality shows that he's wrong.

Arguing with BL aside - are you saying Rivera was more valuable over his career than Mussina? He was historically good, but I think Mussina's career as a starter was more valuable.

its not a question of who was more valuable? Rivera was the best closer ever. Mussina was maybe in the top 50 starting pitchers ever. It doesn't matter how they compare to each other. They play different positions. It matters how they compare to others at the same position.

Let me edit that. It doesn't matter when judging who should be in the Hall of Fame.