1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Jimmy Rollins: HOF?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Dick Whitman, Apr 4, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JC

    JC Well-Known Member

    If it is limited, tyou are starting with the premise that there is limited difference between players batting eye. That is 100% false
     
  2. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Outs
    Jimmy Rollins - 6,726
    Bobby Grich - 5,057
     
  3. CD Boogie

    CD Boogie Well-Known Member

    So we're basically arguing which guy -- Grich or Rollins -- is less worthy of reaching the HOF, bc neither of them deserve to be in Cooperstown...The line starts behind Dick Allen of guys who absolutely deserve to be in but are not.
     
    cyclingwriter2 likes this.
  4. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I believe that's correct, that we are arguing the relative merits of Grich and Rollins, although I would argue that Grich deserves very strong consideration and may, indeed, merit induction some day.
     
  5. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    Stop talking about the stupid eye test. How appealing a player subjectively looked to you has no relevance to their HOF worthiness. Might as well be judging them based on how much you like their bubble gum card as a kid.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2016
  6. CD Boogie

    CD Boogie Well-Known Member

    [QUOTE="How appealing a player subjectively looked to you has no relevance to their HOF worthiness.[/QUOTE]

    People earn MVPs and All-Star games appearances and, indeed, fame in their day because of exactly how they appeal to people subjectively. Which is exactly why an old school cock like Dick Allen is not in the hall. Numbers can tell you a lot, but they certainly can't paint a full picture of something as abstract as "fame."

    Some guys get in for stats, others for postseason performance, some a mix of the two. It's also a good mix of arguments, but the eye test is certainly an element. You can argue against it, but you're screaming at clouds.
     
  7. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Are you under the impression that there are no stats kept during the postseason?
     
  8. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I have no idea what the fuck the "eye test" even is. Can you explain it to me?
     
  9. CD Boogie

    CD Boogie Well-Known Member

    Do you even think before you reply? You're like diarrhea of the keys.

    I meant, and I think anyone who thought about it for more than two seconds would know, that postseason performance becomes a big deciding factor
     
  10. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Who is arguing against that?
     
  11. 3_Octave_Fart

    3_Octave_Fart Well-Known Member

    Ryne Sandberg wasn't a true Hall of Famer, either.
    Comparing Biggio to Sandberg was always an insult to Biggio.
     
  12. CD Boogie

    CD Boogie Well-Known Member

    You just hunt around for arguments that no one is making....haha. forget it. Go back and read. Slower this time.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page