2023 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

He's not in because he can't hit a curveball.

 

Leroy Kelly — I still haven’t figured out how he got in.

 

Trammell and Morris weren’t on the committee that left Whitaker off the ballot. I’m sure if jackasses like Tracy Ringolsby and his ilk had given Whitaker his due and put him on the ballot, Trammell and Morris would have turbocharged his candidacy. They both know he’s more deserving than Morris and at least as deserving as Trammell.

And Gibson was not better than Baines.

 

It is interesting how people weigh people’s candidacy, but this is a drum ive banged here a lot and that’s that the rules stipulate a guy needs 10 years to be considered and over that time (or more) is considered superior to his peers. It says nothing about 2,000 hits (which people cite as factors to not vote for Dick Allen or Thurman Munson, or that they had a bad tailoff like Murphy who would have probably benefited from falling off a cliff like Jim Rice.

Rice, to me, is the perfect example of a player who was a dominant force for a decade plus, but doesnt have the counting stats that guarantee enshrinement.

The rules for election make no mention of milestone stats or longevity. Just 10 plus years and excellence.
For that reason, Mattingly and Belle off this ballot belong along with Bonds and Clemens. Compilers like McGriff and Palmeiro — never the best at their positions— should rank lower to me. Mattingly was amazing for more than half a decade.

Id have no problem with Murphy. But i dont see the case for mcgriff over mattingly, no way. That’s writers using specious reasoning.

 

Mattingly was amazing for four years from 84-87. he followed that with two very good years and another very good year later in his career.

By OPS+, Mattingly's best seasons are: 161. 156, 156, 146, 133, 128 and 120 playing in at least 134 games in those years

By OPS+, McGriff's best seasons are: 165, 165, 157, 153, 147, 144, 144 and 142 playing in at least 144 games in those years, plus a 157 in the strike-shortened year where he played 113 of a possible 114 games.

 

Since I once made a similar comment , and got mugged on here:
— he was the nfl’s second all time leading rusher when he retired.
— two rushing titles will get you points.
— five times finishing in the top 10 in rushing.
— also was a very good kick returner his first two years in the league.

 

Plus 190 passes for 2,281 yards and 13 touchdowns for that era isn't shabby for a running back to go with an All-Decade Team, three first-team All-Pros and a second-team All-Pro

He's one of 38 players with at least 90 total touchdowns. When he was inducted in 1994 he was one of 14.

 

fair enough, but I'd bet dollars to donuts the term "OPS+" is not used once among committee members, fair or otherwise. I don't they think'll much further than black ink -- not using that term, but looking at how many times Mattingly led the league in main categories. He has a black ink of 27; McGriff is 9.

I really don't have a problem with ANY of these guys getting elected. What I have a problem with is stacking committees with members with ties to a player. Who's gonna be Mattingly's biggest cheerleader?

Is there a limit on how many people each member can vote for? Or will everyone with 75 percent of the vote make it?

And how do they do the process? Like if Murphy is considered first and makes it, will that affect how people vote for McGriff?

 

Plus he spent a couple of years as Jim Brown’s fullback

 

He also has a signature hamburger named after him at a bar in downtown Canton, but that’s another story.

 

I believe he was Brown's backup. Brown was the fullback and Ernie Green was the halfback. At that time, fullbacks were often the featured runners.

 

Every voter has three votes. Anyone getting 75 percent is elected, so the max to be elected is four