2013 MLB Hall of Fame Screechfest

Anyway, convinced I've gotten the best of you in this debate in every way, shape, and form for 57 pages, I'm going to go enjoy my weekend. Better luck next time!

 

Maybe. You also have to remember that 1945 and '46 were very unusual elections, with an experimental selection procedure that didn't make much sense to anyone. After there were no elections in 1943 and '44 due to war, in 1945 the Hall of Fame Board instituted a two-round system with a nominating vote and then a selection vote. Writers were asked to name 10 candidates on the first ballot, then the top 21 candidates out of that round were named to the second ballot, where they needed the customary 75 percent approval to get elected. Everyone was confused by it. It was said "the writers stymied themselves" with the complicated system, and it was scrapped after no one was elected either year.

Of course, in April of each year, the special Old Timers Committee (made up of Hall of Fame officials, senior baseball executives and senior writers) picked 11 and 10 players, respectively, for the Hall of Fame. So they did hold big ceremonies in Cooperstown that summer.

 

If you need to delude yourself that badly to enjoy your weekend, that sounds like a personal problem.

 

I think you left a word out there, but that would only support my argument that voters are hurting a players long-term chances of making it when they withhold their vote, so thank you for helping me out there.

No wonder you think you have that delusion that you "won." You don't even understand the points being made against you.

You clearly think I was complaining about voters having an influence over one another. I was not. I was saying that they do have an influence over one another and that is why leaving a player off a ballot can have an impact beyond just that ballot. I really do think there is a chance that a deserving player like Bagwell, who some see as borderline even without the accusations of PED use, could end up never getting in because voters are too busy making statements or "waiting to be sure" to vote for him even though he belongs in the Hall of Fame.

 

Dick has all the modesty and social graces of Donald Sutherland wearing the sweater in "Animal House."

 

How long have you had your HOF vote, oop?

 

How many years did you play in the NFL, alphabet boy? None? Well, then how long was your coaching career? Never did that either, did you?

Ok, no more talking about the NFL for you.

 

Keep this up, and you're both going to be stripped of your prized BBWAA membership.

 

Did NOT need the visual

 

Finally, someone comes to my defense about Biggio being borderline...

http://joeposnanski.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-bbwaa-project-second-base.html

 

Borderline in a great Hall of Fame. Not so borderline compared with historical precedence.

Alomar. Sandberg. Biggio. I think he pretty much fits.

 

I see your point. Biggio was a good guy who enjoyed playing the game. He wasn't great. He was consistent, which made him a star. I put him and Palmeiro in the same category.