HOF Snub

[SAump]

I started the thread to discuss elgible MLB HOF candidates. I did so after recalling how our members wrote their own personal recollections in kind regards for Mr. Buck O'Neil. In this respect, I would like to ask our members to continue the discussion on any former MLB star denied entry into the MLB HOF.

The following quote kinda sums up my opinion. "I don't know if there is a timetable. I don't think there is a timetable, but hopefully writers will maybe do a little bit more research," Blyleven said.

Source: http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slu...v=ap&type=lgns

What would you like to add?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Rich Gossage.

[DG]

Until Pete Rose is enshrined I have no interest in others who have been snubbed.

Gwynn and Ripken are great entries.

[DG]

Originally Posted by PWL

They have a special wing for him in Las Vegas in the Gamblers Hall of Fame. I have no use for Hit King myself. He knew the penalty. He finally stopped lieing. He should stop crying.

HOF for players is about how well they played. HOF for managers is about how well they managed.

[DG]

Originally Posted by PWL

Rose broke cardinal sin number one and two. No player shall bet on baseball. It is there in black and white and flashing neon light. Now the supposed steroid users are going to feel the wrath of the voters. One of the nicest guys in the game will probably wait many years to get in, if ever at all (Rafael Palmiero).

I don't see Rose ever getting in, unless he has a ticket. Even now he is not welcome around the game at all. I know people will say he should get in because of his numbers and how hard he played the game. But make no mistake, Rose was more concerned if he went four for four than if his team won the game.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/roseontrial.html#

You are ill advised. Do some research.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by DG

http://espn.go.com/mlb/roseontrial.html#

You are ill advised. Do some research.

That site is dated and inaccurate. Rose admitted on national television to ABC's Charles Gibson that he bet on baseball and he bet on his team.

They replayed those admissions this past week and will probably do so everytime the HOF ballots are mailed.

[kylejt]

Here's what I don't like about it. Gossage will get in next year, that's almost a given. So, in the voters mind he's a HoF player, but just not THIS year. So the question is, how will his stats change between this year and next?

It's such a dumb process to let players hang on year after year. Either you is, or you ain't. You get one shot on the ballot, and one more with vets. One and done.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by kylejt

Here's what I don't like about it. Gossage will get in next year, that's almost a given. So, in the voters mind he's a HoF player, but just not THIS year. So the question is, how will his stats change between this year and next?

It's such a dumb process to let players hang on year after year. Either you is, or you ain't. You get one shot on the ballot, and one more with vets. One and done.

One shot on the ballot without 75% approval is the criteria which keeps almost everyone out. You actually suggested that a player who fails to meet the criteria no longer deserves any other consideration. End of arguement, the baseball writers have spoken. Writers may think of the criteria as some type of lifetime achievement award in comparison to the "chosen few" who have already been selected.

If such a criteria were in place, Mr. Blyleven and any number of '79 Pirates and '87 Twins would no longer deserve consideration. I think you will agree with me that the determining factor should be the statistics. For example, every single player has unique talents. Mr. Blyleven and others all have the statistics to prove their HOF elgibility. Each player should be chosen based on any particular talent among his group of peers. Mr. Blyleven and others should have walked right through the selection process.