MLB: Who might not make the HOF, but should?
 

So, who looks like they won't make the hall of Fame, but they really really should? Here's my list.

Ron Santo
Ryne Sandberg
Bert Blyleven
Barry Larkin
Craig Biggio
Alan Trammell
Lou Whitaker
Tim Raines

PETE ROSE

Like I showed at WrestleMania XX.....

ROSE
14

No.

That's all I'll have to say. Keyboards-a-plenty have died in this war.

4256

thats all I have to say :)

No, get that fucking scumbag the fuck out of my topic.

So, if you are a scumbag, you shouldn't be in the HOF.

This isn't a morality hall of fame, its a baseball one hence the reason Ty Cobb and Orlando Cepeda are in

THANK YOU

Being an asshole is different from betting on the game. His gambling compromised the integrity of the game.

Personally I have to agree with Supreme on this one. We have drug addicts, alcoholics, people who played drunk(Ruth), murderes (Cobb), and people who used steroids in there. All of that is worse than gambling, I say put Rose in there, put a italics beside his name but put him in.

Gaylord Perry threw spitballs. I believe that is altering the game and hurting baseball's integrity.

Man, you really hate gamblers.

Tom Glavine in regards to the topic.

Yes, I agree. However, don't you think it's a fundamentally different question?

Oh come on. There're plenty of gamblers in the HOF. It's not that he bet the horses, or played blackjack. He bet on his own games!

First, we'll assume Pete Rose never bet against the Reds.

The baseball season is 162 games long. It is the manager's job to utilize the players given to him in such a way that he gets the most wins out of them. By placing bets on certain games, he is now doing things in his own best interest, and not the team's. What if he bets on a game, and then leaves his ace starter in for 140 pitches. Even though he may win that game, his starter can't seem to throw strikes for the next month. Maybe his starters are beat up, but he trots them out there, despite their complaints, because he's got 2000 riding on this game. And maybe he doesn't play the kids, even though they're the future of the club, because they can't do anything yet, and he needs a win.

There are many situations where trying to win now hurts the team in the long run.

It ALSO opens up the possibility that Pete Rose gets into a little debt, and the bookies ask Rose to toss one.

The fact that there's even the question and the possibility that Pete Rose threw games is horrifying. This is what the rulemakers believed when they made the rule, I think. And I completely agree with it.

This is how it's different from corking a bat, or using steroids (or greenies, or spitballs): by gambling, Pete Rose brought in the possibility that he wasn't attempting to win. He may have had to do that; we don't know.

No one's trying to lose by throwing a spitter.

He isn't getting in for being a good manager.

I gotta think Glavo's in. He'll finish with 275 career wins. The guys who have that and aren't in are Kaat, John, and Blyleven; all of them have over 200 losses. Glavine probably won't break 180.

Another name to throw out: Fred McGriff.

If we would have undeniable proof he threw games as a manager, would you let him in?

He probably will, but he better not use a Mets cap. :mad:

Yes, for what he did as a player.

Word

Ryan Sandberg is one name that definately comes to mind.

They wouldn't let him use a Mets cap.

See, here's my problem with that argument, Freg. The bat he used for his record breaking hit? In the Hall. The plaques for the world series? In the Hall. It's not like Pete Rose isn't all over the Hall of Fame - he just doesn't have a plaque.

And you know what? I don't think he should.

I don't know if I'd even rate him in the top 100 players, anyway.

Didn't he admit to betting a while ago? And then apologize for his actions?

I am not being an ass or anything, I don't remember if he did this or not. :o

Yeah he admitted to it, and also stated that he didn't bet on his own games.

He admitted to it in his book.

C'mon. Really. The guy lied for 14 years, basically let a witchhunt against John Dowd et all, and then he said... "Okay. I lied... sorta! I didn't bet on my own games, though, really, I was lying before, but I'm telling the truth now!"

Really now Pete?

I'm a trustworthy guy, so I'll take his word on it. :-\

I still say let him in as a player he didn't bet on a team he was managing then, because he wasn't a manager. He was one of the greatest players to ever walk onto a diamond. He still holds the record for being the all time hits leader.

Pete Rose SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN THE HALL OF FAME. He bet on baseball, he bet on his own team and was caught. NO HALL OF FAME. Like Wonder said, there are probably so many HOF'ers that bet on the game, but they weren't caught, so we don't really know.

And until JOE fk'n Jackson gets into the HOF, Pete Rose should NEVER be allowed in there. Fk'n Jackson didn't do anything wrong except KNOW about the fix of 1919. He has a .356 career average (3rd highest) and he's one of the greatest players of all-time. It's a bunch of bullsh**.

BTW, Biggio and Larkin are definately in IMO. If you ever read Bill Jame's stuff, he ranks Biggio as the 35th greatest player of all-time. Not that James is Mr. know it all, but that's saying something.

Tim Raines was the best player in baseball when he was in his prime. That's good enough for me.

I'm kinda afraid Chipper Jones won't. Considering (besides what will probably happen this year) that he has made 100 RBIs in all of his 9 seasons or so, and has an average at least over .300, I think he probably will deserve it later on.

But since he had to go outfielder, his stock went down. Too many outfielders in the HOF as we speak. At 3B, he most probably would have made it.

OK well there's over 100 people in the hall of fame so that doesn't really matter.

A .303 career batting average and 4200 hits isn't exactly something a platoon player achieves every 5 years

Rose = IN.

As much as I love Bill James, I think he overrates Craig Biggio. I think Biggio was a wonderful player and deserver to be in the Hall, though.

I don't know about Joe Jackson in the hall. Maybe. Eddie Cicote deserves it more.

BTW, LC, www.baseballthinkfactory.org

He was one of them, I think. Mike Schmidt was better. So was Wade Boggs and George Brett.

But those are three hall of Famers.

:rofl:

Pete Rose played in his own best interest so he can't get into the hall.

Isn't that what you call holding out for a billion dollar contract?

A-Rod, sorry, you're too selfish. You're not getting into the HOF. :wave:

As much as I love my boy Jimmy T. (Thome) I don't think he will make it into the Hall... :(

No way, I have Jackson on my top 30 for sure. He was incredible. He could hit, throw and had speed. He hit .408 in his first full season and never hit below .300 in one full season. How many guys can test to that? His SLG AND OBP are even more of a sight to behold. His last full season he hit .382, so you know he was going to have more great seasons had he not been thrown out of the game.

Cicote is a tough call as he was good, but not great He had two 20 win seasons in a row before he was canned, so maybe he would of had some more great seasons. But there is no chance of him going in cause he actually threw some games.


Cool site and it's good to know there is someone else here that knows his sh** about the history of baseball. :y: :y:

Thing is, Cicotte had more playing time than Jackson.

....

You've got the reading comprehension and debate skills of an aborted fetus.

Actually it was only like a year more, maybe 2. So it's about the same.

ok using that logic, he could have not bet on baseball and said he did so people would stop talking about it

kinda silly dont you think

Jackson didn't start playing regularly until about 3 years after Cicotte, and missed most of 1918.

That, and, pitchers threw more innings. So Eddie has over 3000 innings while Shoeless Joe has less than 6000 PA.

True, but he dominated every year he played for the 9 or 10 full years he played. He put up some of the greatest numbers ever seen and he's definately up there with Cobb, Wagner, Lajoie and Speaker during during that time as far as hitting goes. But this discussion can go on forever, so to each his own I guess.

Oh, if he died or got injured or something, I'd probably say let him in. But the Black Sox specter hanging over his head... too much for me. He took the money. I don't care if he hit .356. It's 9 games, hit well in a couple and stink up the rest, there's your .356. It doesn't account defense, either.

So yeah.

JOE CARTER

Bert Blylevin for sure, although it doesn't look too promising now :sad:

Care to argue why? He was more or less an average player for a long time. McGriff, Dawson, Will Clark, Jim Thome, and Carlos Delgado get in way before him.

Yeah Dawson. :y:

I actually did a report on this. Dawson, Sandberg, and Larkin were three of the names I discussed.

I also did a side section of guys that should make it stat wise but won't due to personal shit. Two main ones I talked about? Yep, Joe and Pete. :)

Dick Allen also belongs in that list, though he was just the biggest asshole this side of Ty Cobb.

He was consistent a 30 HR/100 RBI guy, he was a multi-time all star, and he hit the biggest homerun in Blue Jays history.

He may not be as good as the guys mentioned on your list but I still think he should get in. And he'll for sure be there before Thome and Delgado retire

Joe Carter's no longer eligible to be elected by the Hall of Fame, as he didn't even receive 5% of the vote from the election. He would have to be inducted by the Veteran's committe.

His highest MVP ranking was 3rd.

His career OBP was .306. In no way should anyone with a career OBP of .306 should not get into the Hall of Fame based on his offense.

Bobby Thomson hit a bigger home run, but he's not in the hall of fame. Carter's ball probably already is.

Ty Cobb bet on baseball.

In 1919, Joe Jackson was kicked out of baseball because he knew about his teamates throwing the World Series. He played his hardest, however he was banned from baseball & the hall of fame because he knew about his teammates throwing it and didn't say anything. The Black Sox second baseman Eddie Collins also knew about the fix, but since no gamblers approached him, he got off the hook and went on to be in the hall.

^^I know. I'd say about half pro ball players bet on baseball or were involved in some kind of gambling activity with the game back in the deadball era. It was a common thing. Hal Chase was notorious for betting on games. Pitchers probably threw games all the time. I have this DVD set called the "History of Baseball" which has 10 DVD's on all the era's. But in the deadball era DVD, they were saying how the fans might shout out to an outfielder, "20 if you drop it" and the player might drop the ball to collect the money from the fan. That's how it was back then.

I'm not sure Collins knew about the fix. He might of known something was up, but I don't think he was 100% sure. After seeing how his team was playing though, it was not far fectched to see that there was something going on. Almost all of Collon's teammates hated him, so I don't think they would of told him about it.

let's discuss my boy Jimmy Thome :(

You really don't want to do that. Bill James is pretty accurate, and his numbers put Thome's numbers solidly below HOF standards, esp for a 1B.

Dawson was awesome but injuries killed his career. We never really got to see the Hawk at his best.

Thome's got an outside chance, I think, PH. He needs to keep up the good hitting for about 4, 5 more years and have a slow decline phase, but he can do it. He wouldn't be the worst player in, anyway.

Montreal's turf didn't help. Hawk is someone I'd consider, and I don't think it'd be a crime to let him in. In any case, he's *THE* Borderline candidate.