Jack Morris and Alan Trammell... Topic

sjpoker
Posts: 3556 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 107
Prospect
... are some weak *** additions to the Hall of Fame.

I think both were very good players, but they just fall short of "Hall of Fame."

12/10/2017 6:32 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18995 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 153 32 129
Prospect
I need to know BL's opinion. I think he is a Trammell guy. But what about Morris?

The fact that these two got in, and Marvin Miller was once again snubbed, is a ******* joke.
12/10/2017 7:56 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote post by bad_luck on 11/6/2017 5:48:00 PM:
Posted by Got_Worms on 11/6/2017 4:19:00 PM (view original):
New veteran's committee will meet next month to elect candidates from a pretty impressive ballot.

Who would get your vote?

Personally, I think Steve Garvey, Don Mattingly, and Marvin Miller deserve induction. Really every candidate has a good case!

https://baseballhall.org/modern-baseball-era-ballot-2018
Trammell gets my vote.

No one else.
12/10/2017 8:00 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Miller changed baseball more than Babe Ruth. As I understand it, he was a massive *****. But he should be in the HOF.
12/10/2017 8:01 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18995 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 153 32 129
Prospect
Morris gets elected basically because of one game, his 10 inning, 1-0 complete game shutout in game 7 of the 1991 World Series.

Without that game, he doesn't get the support that got him elected today.

That's not the way it's supposed to work.
12/10/2017 10:17 PM
d_rock97
Posts: 4009 (0)
Hall of Famer
622
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 12/10/2017 10:17:00 PM (view original):
Morris gets elected basically because of one game, his 10 inning, 1-0 complete game shutout in game 7 of the 1991 World Series.

Without that game, he doesn't get the support that got him elected today.

That's not the way it's supposed to work.
It’s the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Stats


12/11/2017 3:33 AM
bronxcheer
Posts: 17259 (0)
Hall of Famer
298
Hall of Famer
No. No.
12/11/2017 4:53 AM
sjpoker
Posts: 3556 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 107
Prospect
Miller was a massive ***** to the owners. That's all you need to know. As for Morris, I remember him as one of the better pitchers during his time, and from this year to that year he might be considered the best, but he certainly no Roger Clemens.
12/11/2017 5:23 AM
thejuice6
Posts: 9844 (0)
Hall of Famer
1802 1 1 1
Hall of Famer
Never was a big "Jack Morris" guy myself but I thought his recent words were interesting:

"For years my earned run average has been an issue for a lot of people that thought it was not good enough for Hall of Fame honors, but I never once thought about pitching for an ERA. I always thought about completing games, starting games, eating up innings and trying to win games more importantly than anything else," he said. "Today's generation is different. In my heart of hearts I don't think for a second that guys that are pitching, the elite guys especially that are pitching in the game today, could not do what we did. I know they could. But they haven't been conditioned to it, both physically and mentally."

"Now I'm getting analyzed by a bunch of numbers and things that didn't exist when I played, he said. "Had they existed maybe I would have had a better understanding of what it would have meant to not pitch through pain, to not go deeper into games on nights that I told my manager, `I'm fine' when I wasn't. But I don't regret doing that, because if you go to the wall and never try to push down the wall, you'll never know if you can."

12/11/2017 7:55 AM
rsp777
Posts: 13243 (0)
Hall of Famer
337 3
Prospect
Trammell deserved to be in. He was FAR better than Ozzie Smith. Morris does not belong. Though he was a horse, he was never a truly dominant pitcher. Even Bert Blyleven deserves to be in before Morris and there is NO WAY Blyleven should have ever been elected to the HOF.
12/11/2017 7:57 AM
Tdiddy
Posts: 1349 (0)
Hall of Famer
258 3
Rookie
Neither one....smh
12/11/2017 8:20 AM
cccp1014
Posts: 13927 (0)
Hall of Famer
394 1 1
Prospect
HoF is diluted for sure.
12/11/2017 8:38 AM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by cccp1014 on 12/11/2017 8:38:00 AM (view original):
HoF is diluted for sure.
Not really. There have been over 19,000 players in MLB history. There are about 220 in the hall of fame.

That’s like a hair over 1%. Pretty exclusive hall of fame.

Trammell belongs. He was as good as Larkin and Jeter.
12/11/2017 9:35 AM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Morris, on the other hand, does not belong. He wasn’t very good.
12/11/2017 9:36 AM
thejuice6
Posts: 9844 (0)
Hall of Famer
1802 1 1 1
Hall of Famer
"Now I'm getting analyzed by a bunch of numbers and things that didn't exist when I played, he said. "Had they existed maybe I would have had a better understanding of what it would have meant to not pitch through pain, to not go deeper into games on nights that I told my manager, `I'm fine' when I wasn't. But I don't regret doing that, because if you go to the wall and never try to push down the wall, you'll never know if you can."

When I read this statement regarding stats, the first thing that popped in my mind was the Catfish Hunter debate that took place earlier...


12/11/2017 10:02 AM
1|2|3...46 Next ▸
Jack Morris and Alan Trammell... Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 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.