dmbjeff Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 i also believe that each hof voter gets up to 10 votes, most choose not to use them all though....nolan ryan got in on the first ballot but didnt recieve 100% of the vote, which is just assinine and shows u how far the hof voters have their head's up their asses... im a firm believer blyleven should be in......the guy has 3701(5th all time) strikeouts and he cant get in? r u serious? he also has 287(25th all time) wins....its just retarded...voters will point out that his career winning pct. isnt good or he only made 2 allstar teams but here are some more stats of his: 240 cg 60 shut outs 3.31 era 1.19 whip apparently he sucks with those numbers...the hof fame is full of BS, Brian Gorman style. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 12, 2006 -> 01:55 PM) I never really understood the first ballot vs. 13th ballot thing. The stats aren't improving, so why is it that all of a sudden he's HoF worthy? EXACTLY. Is there a maximum number of players that can be inducted per year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jan 12, 2006 -> 12:40 PM) I didn't realize it when he mentioned it, but Puckett's career numbers are fairly pedestrian. His batting average is very impressive, but his power numbers certainly aren't. The Gold Gloves probably help too. One wonders if he'd be a first ballot HOF'er with our current obsession with power numbers and OBP. I thought that he was one of those guys that was an instant in because he got 3,000 hits, but apparently I'm confusing my players. I didn't realize that he only played 12 years. I've never been that big on Jim Rice. He had four seasons that I would call very good and a couple more that were pretty good. I'm not sure I'd call that HOF caliber. He kind of fits into the Rafael Palmeiro category with me: consistently above average but rarely elite. I think he's going to have a really tough time getting in because his numbers just aren't that impressive compared to current day numbers, and some people seem to believe that Fenway Park helped him a lot. Red sox fan hyping rice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(q\/\/3r+y @ Jan 12, 2006 -> 02:47 PM) Red sox fan hyping rice... The guy hit it right on the head, he picked the best year from each of the players and tried to make a comparison with his example. He also used the criterion that you absolutely need to get a home run. That situation is pretty rare. If you set it up like that, Rice should be the pick if you are going to use 1977-1979 and 1983 as your major argument, I simply can't counter it. He was a very good hitter in those years, and if he had about 3 or 4 more seasons like them he'd be a no brainer. However, he didn't do that. He didn't crack 30 homers in any of his other 14 full seasons. Considering that his homers and RBI are his only major selling points (decent but not stellar batting average), that's not a good thing. His comparisons of the players don't mean much to me either. Puckett is somewhat similar, but he was a far superior fielder and hit about 20 points higher on his career. Were it not for a shortened career he almost certainly would have reached 3,000 hits. Even at his peak it would have taken Rice at least 3 more years to reach the magical 500 homer plateau. It's not really fair to compare batting numbers with Carter because he is a catcher and is under entirely different expectations. He might be similar to Winfield (I'm not a huge fan of his either), but Winfield was also a superior fielder and could run in his prime. He also didn't have the problem with a shortened career. He also conveniently left Mike Schmidt, Reggie Jackson, and Dale Murphy out of the conversation, who are 3 quality sluggers that were more consistent and had similar highs. Plus Rice doesn't have any major postseason exploits to back him up. If Rice had reached either 500 homers or 3,000 hits, he'd probably be in. But without either of those milestones you've got to accomplish a lot more to get in. Rice strikes me as the epitomy of a borderline HOF. He's being compared with the other top OF'ers of all time, and he just doesn't stack up too well with most of them. Edited January 12, 2006 by ZoomSlowik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baines3 Posted January 14, 2006 Share Posted January 14, 2006 Gossage should be ticked off. He should have been selected before Sutter. Jim Rice was another one who should have been elected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.