OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

Tickkid · 04-21-2002, 05:06 AM

I have been reading this very interesting thread, and it prompted me to register and jump in. I am a casual baseball fan. I have a broad grasp of baseball history, and just enjoy the sport for what it is. I find these Hall of Fame debates interesting, fun, but also bufuddling. The numbers of the sport are the most interesting to me, and as far as regards the Hall of Fame, how important is a players career numbers to getting into the Hall? I mean, the game changes so much all the time, new stadiums, Coors Field, expansion, different rules, different balls, different dimensions... you would think that the players numbers would be more of a looser guideline and would put people into the Hall alot more then keeping people out.

Barry Larkin is one of my all time favorite players. I always assumed he would get into the hall, with an MVP, and his constant stellar play, and just being one of the 'big name' guys over a large period of time. Now that I read over all of this, it totally amazes me what goes into getting a guy into the Hall of Fame. Looking over these arguments, I could definatly see how he should not get in. I kinda looked over the people that are in the hall, and some arguments over some of the more recent players to get in or to not get in, and it seems like baseball draws a line in the sand, that it is happy to erase and move... I am torn in this respect... on one hand, the hall of fame should be the mecca of baseball. It should really show the game as it progressed, and the players who helped the game move into the different periods, and were exceptional players. But the more time that passes, and the more players get it, I also think the game should recognize the players that 'brought the noise' year in and year out, such as a Larkin. It is an interesting quandry... but this is a great thread, you guys really know what the heck you are talking about.

04-21-2002, 05:06 AM	#23
Tickkid Minors (Single A) Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 51	I have been reading this very interesting thread, and it prompted me to register and jump in. I am a casual baseball fan. I have a broad grasp of baseball history, and just enjoy the sport for what it is. I find these Hall of Fame debates interesting, fun, but also bufuddling. The numbers of the sport are the most interesting to me, and as far as regards the Hall of Fame, how important is a players career numbers to getting into the Hall? I mean, the game changes so much all the time, new stadiums, Coors Field, expansion, different rules, different balls, different dimensions... you would think that the players numbers would be more of a looser guideline and would put people into the Hall alot more then keeping people out. Barry Larkin is one of my all time favorite players. I always assumed he would get into the hall, with an MVP, and his constant stellar play, and just being one of the 'big name' guys over a large period of time. Now that I read over all of this, it totally amazes me what goes into getting a guy into the Hall of Fame. Looking over these arguments, I could definatly see how he should not get in. I kinda looked over the people that are in the hall, and some arguments over some of the more recent players to get in or to not get in, and it seems like baseball draws a line in the sand, that it is happy to erase and move... I am torn in this respect... on one hand, the hall of fame should be the mecca of baseball. It should really show the game as it progressed, and the players who helped the game move into the different periods, and were exceptional players. But the more time that passes, and the more players get it, I also think the game should recognize the players that 'brought the noise' year in and year out, such as a Larkin. It is an interesting quandry... but this is a great thread, you guys really know what the heck you are talking about.