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!

Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Hank_Scorpio, Nov 27, 2009.

  1. PopeDirkBenedict

    PopeDirkBenedict Active Member

    Please tell me what decade that was when Morris was the best pitcher in baseball.

    Morris was at his best in the 1980s, which is a pretty weird decade starting pitching wise. The best pitchers are in the Hall of Pretty Good (Morris, Guidry, Stewart, Hershiser, Stieb, Viola, Sutcliffe, Scott, Saberhagen, Tudor, John) or couldn't sustain their success (Doc, Fernando). The other good pitchers were guys like Carlton and Blyleven who came of age in the 70s. Clemens is the exception. If Morris was the best pitcher in baseball for a decade, he was the tallest midget in a decade filled with some damn short midgets.
     
  2. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    True. I would have no problem if the Hall was limited to the George Bretts, the Mike Schmidts, the Reggie Jacksons of the world. But once "very good" players started making it that's where the debate gets interesting/ugly.

    For the record, I think Blyleven should be in and Morris should not. I was just pointing out the argument. You can't vote for a guy with a 3.91 ERA.
     
  3. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I agree with everything you just said.
     
  4. jagtrader

    jagtrader Active Member

    I can't believe I'm saying this, but Morris is probably going to make it. He has climbed over 50 percent and the hype machine will take it from here. Comments like "best pitcher in the 80s" will be said so often people will actually think they are true. I'm amazed at the jump he took this year.
     
  5. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    Wow, you're getting so cranky there your typing went to shit, spnited. :)

    It's simple. When a voter decides whether or not a player should be on his ballot, there should only be one factor at play -- does he believe that the player in question belongs in the Hall of Fame or not. The voter should not be concerned with keeping the guy from being unanimous. He should not be following some idiotic, self-imposed rule about not voting for anybody the first year they are on the ballot. And he sure as hell shouldn't be thinking about doing something to draw attention to himself.

    If the player belongs in the Hall, put him on the ballot. If not, leave him off. If you can't do that, you don't deserve the vote. And in the case of Johnson, there is no possible way you can look at his career and say he isn't a Hall of Famer. None.
     
  6. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    How many other players have all of these stats?


    * making twelve straight All-Star teams (1990–2001)
    * winning a record ten gold gloves at second base (1991–96, 1998–2001)
    * batting over .300 nine times (1992–1997, 1999–2001)
    * posting an OBP over .400 five times (1992–93, 1996, 1999, 2001)
    * scoring 100 or more runs six times (1992–93, 1996, 1999–2001)
    * driving in 100 or more runs twice (1999, 2001)
    * stealing 30 or more bases eight times (1989, 1991–93, 1995, 1999–2001)
    * winning four Silver Slugger awards (1992, 1996, 1999–2000)


    Of those, how many are in the Hall of Fame?
     
  7. daemon

    daemon Well-Known Member

    I agree Alomar needs to be in. But just for argument's sake. . .

    OPS
    Larkin: .815
    Alomar: .814

    OPS+
    Larkin: 116
    Alomar: 116

    SB-per-162
    Larkin: 28
    Alomar: 32

    HR-per-162
    Larkin: 15
    Alomar: 14

    Avg
    Larkin: .295
    Alomar: .300

    OBP
    Larkin: .371
    Alomar: .371

    SO-per-162
    Larkin: 61
    Alomar: 78

    RS-per-162
    Larkin: 99
    Alomar: 103

    ASG
    Larkin: 12
    Alomar: 12

    MVP
    Larkin: 1
    Alomar: 0

    Gold Glove
    Larkin: 3
    Alomar: 10
     
  8. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    It's going to be very interesting to see who gets in as all of the steroid era players become eligible. I think we'll see a lot of borderline players from the 70s and 80s get in before we start seeing guys like McGwire, Palmeiro, Sosa... make it.
     
  9. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    Also, how much did Alomar's AIDS/non-protected-sex lawsuit thing affect voters?
     
  10. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    During his heyday, Alomar was plainly recognized as being not just the best at his position but one of the top half-dozen players in the game. Larkin was never in that dialogue. Nor Dawson.
     
  11. I Should Coco

    I Should Coco Well-Known Member

    My two cents: If ENOUGH voters didn't think Blyleven was good enough, what pitchers from the 1980s will be? I agree that Blyleven should be in before Morris. After those two?

    I also can't understand the huge disparity in voter support between Dawson and Raines.

    Oh, and Pope:

    ... this comment was struck on the screws!
     
  12. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    What years was Morris the best pitcher in the game?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page