Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

I know there are a few voters on here.

How will they evaluate the players with "steroid issues"

I'm assuming that in the next few years, that applies to:

McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro, Bonds, Clemens and I'm sure there are a couple guys I'm forgetting.

 

I figured this would be the year Harold Baines dropped off, as the minority of pro-DH folks would transfer their vote to Martinez. But he increased his total. Has anybody ever gone the full 15 years, only getting between 5/6/7 percent of the vote?

 

No, I didn't say that at all.

What in the HELL are you talking about?

 

First of all, I never referred to such a standard, though I don't necessarily disagree with a voter having such a standard. I said a voter should base things on their evaluations, not on the players who are already in. If they base it on the players who are already in, they are no longer using their evaluations but the evaluations of past voters. Considering your critiques on voters, I doubt you would endorse that.

Secondly, not sure where the "guys I liked" part comes in either. But there's nothing imaginary about deciding your subjective evaluation on greatness and it doesn't go against the requirements. You are correct on what the criteria is, but it is up to each voter to decide how good the playing record must be, how to judge contributions to the team, how much to count character, sportsmanship and integrity. That's the subjective aspect of it and it has nothing to do with ego.

 

Look: I did not say standards SHOULD drop. I said whatever "high" standards some people think the Hall of Fame SHOULD have ... do not exist. They never have.

The Hall of Fame has never been a place for the Unquestionably Great, ever since the voting of 1937.

And no matter what individual voters do from now on, no matter what criteria they use, no matter what "standards" they have, they simply can't make it so. The Hall is what it is -- for better or worse.

It's a place that honors Aaron and Ruth in the exact same room as Hafey and Maranville.

No voting "standard," higher or lower, is going to change that.

 

I've never heard that before. Interesting. I don't necessarily agree with it - first base is challenging? - but it's an interesting theory.

 

First base isn't challenging, but those guys put up huge numbers. If Ryne Sandberg played first base with his numbers, he's buying a ticket like the rest of us if he wants in Cooperstown.

 

OK, that's fine. That makes some sense to me. But when you say "whatever standards the Hall SHOULD have don't exist" you're wrong. Each voter gets to decide what the standard is for him or her. So if for that person the standard is to be unquestionably great -- based on the criteria presented on the ballot and regardless of what anyone else has thought since 1937 -- then they are absolutely within their rights to have that standard. It's their vote and their evaluation of the criteria.

 

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

I'm not the one saying the standard used to be high and now it is low. I said the standard was NEVER that high. Huge difference.

 

That's fine. Whatever. I'm not saying they can't hold that standard.

I have never disputed that.

 

Is catcher looked at the same way? Just askin', not looking to cause any argy bargy. Because looking at the catchers in the hall you see a lot of great players with numbers that are "good for a catcher".

 

Was Sandberg considered a better player than Alomar?