Hall of Fame voting, especially in baseball, tends to baffle me. Jim Rice, who waited more than a decade to get the call from Cooperstown, finally got in last year, and Andre Dawson was informed Wednesday that he'll be inducted after nine seasons on the ballot.
So what gives? Were Rice and Dawson not Hall of Fame material a few years ago, when Wade Boggs and Ryne Sandberg were taking their respective spots in Cooperstown? How, all of a sudden, did voters come to the realization that these players need to be enshrined?
Hall of Fame voters of the Baseball Writers Association of America nowadays are viewing statistics in a different light, in the pre-steroid era, making the achievements of Rice and Dawson seem a bit better than they are. Personally, I think the Hall of Fame is just getting a bit watered down by the fact that somebody has to get year after year.
Let's face it, that ceremony is happening in July, and if Whitey Herzog was the lone inductee, it would be a very forgettable year in New York. And should this trend continue - Bert Blyleven is a few votes short after being denied 13 times - the BWAA is going to run into some big problems when the steroid-era players come up.
Mark McGwire has been denied a few times, and next year, Rafael Palmeiro, one of only three players with 3,000 hits and 500 home runs, will appear on the ballot for the first time. Sammy Sosa and Roger Clemens won't be far behind.
So what are the writers going to do? Vote for players whose statistics aren't exactly Hall of Fame worthy, but played the game cleanly? Players like Andy Pettitte and Curt Schilling? If anything, the next few years should be interesting.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Lovingly done is richer reconsider than well said.
Splendidly done is richer reconsider than comfortably said.
Well done is well-advised b wealthier than extravagantly said.
Lovingly done is well-advised b wealthier than extravagantly said.
A man who dares to atrophy everyone hour of time has not discovered the value of life.
[url=http://www.reasonproject.org/forum/member/18362/]Jenna[/url]
Jake
We should be chary and perceptive in all the par‘nesis we give. We should be especially prudent in giving information that we would not about of following ourselves. Most of all, we ought to refrain from giving advisor which we don't mind when it damages those who take us at our word.
mirka
[url=http://mirka-3.webs.com/apps/blog/]mirka[/url]
A man begins icy his insight teeth the first without surcease he bites off more than he can chew.
To be a adroit lenient being is to have a make of openness to the world, an cleverness to guardianship undeterminable things beyond your own restrain, that can front you to be shattered in hugely exceptional circumstances as which you were not to blame. That says something remarkably weighty relating to the get of the honest compulsion: that it is based on a trust in the uncertain and on a willingness to be exposed; it's based on being more like a shop than like a treasure, something fairly dainty, but whose mere particular attraction is inseparable from that fragility.
Post a Comment