Who Would You Take Out of the MLB HOF?

[John Madden]

Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla

What makes enshrinement special is that it cannot be rescinded. I am whole heartedly against removing any player, in actuality.

However, for the sake of discussion, if I have to pick one, I'd say put an injunction on Deacon White and enter Gavvy Cravath, instead.

Deacon White? He's not even the worst catcher in the HoF.

Rick Ferrell Statistics and History - Baseball-Reference.com

[jazzrack]

Originally Posted by mirrf

How many would have showed up if Justin Beiber were inducted?

no baseball fans, but you may have a thousand tween girls.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by CatKnight

Rose can go in. He bet on baseball - a huge no no - but I haven't heard any evidence he bet against the Reds or manipulated the game.

That doesn't matter. He bet on games involving his own team. The rules on gambling are VERY clear. Bet on baseball games and you're thrown out of the game for at least a year; bet on baseball games to which you have a direct connection and you are thrown out of the game permanently.

Quoting from Major League Rule 21:

BETTING ON BALL GAMES

(1) Any player, umpire, or Club or League official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has no duty to perform, shall be declared ineligible for one year.

(2) Any player, umpire, or Club or League official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform, shall be declared permanently ineligible.

There can be no misunderstanding what these rules say, and they apply not just to players but to everyone connected to the sport. Furthermore, a complete copy of Rule 21 is posted in every clubhouse, so no player or official can say they weren't aware of them.

Rose knew the rules and the penalties for violating them. He chose to disregard that.

[The Game]

Originally Posted by John Madden

Deacon White? He's not even the worst catcher in the HoF.

Rick Ferrell Statistics and History - Baseball-Reference.com

White played 827 games at 3B, 458 at C and alot as an OF and 1B. He went in as a 3B.

[cephasjames]

I don't think that anyone who has admitted to or been caught using steroids/HGH should be refused induction based off of that use. If they fit the criteria for entering the Hall then they should be in. The main reason is because "How do we know how much impact those things actually had on a season or career?" How many of Bonds 73 homeruns in 2001 would he have not hit? How many of his 762 home runs would he have not hit? How do you measure it?

We can says, "He wouldn't hold either record if he weren't juiced up," but can we prove it? There's a lot of evidence that points to him not being able to break either record, but we cannot definitively say that he wouldn't, because we can't measure what he would have done.

[jazzrack]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

That doesn't matter. He bet on games involving his own team. The rules on gambling are VERY clear. Bet on baseball games and you're thrown out of the game for at least a year; bet on baseball games to which you have a direct connection and you are thrown out of the game permanently.

Quoting from Major League Rule 21:

There can be no misunderstanding what these rules say, and they apply not just to players but to everyone connected to the sport. Furthermore, a complete copy of Rule 21 is posted in every clubhouse, so no player or official can say they weren't aware of them.

Rose knew the rules and the penalties for violating them. He chose to disregard that.

should point out that the hall of fame is not a MLB organization

[MorseMoose]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

I don't think that anyone who has admitted to or been caught using steroids/HGH should be refused induction based off of that use. If they fit the criteria for entering the Hall then they should be in. The main reason is because "How do we know how much impact those things actually had on a season or career?" How many of Bonds 73 homeruns in 2001 would he have not hit? How many of his 762 home runs would he have not hit? How do you measure it?

We can says, "He wouldn't hold either record if he weren't juiced up," but can we prove it? There's a lot of evidence that points to him not being able to break either record, but we cannot definitively say that he wouldn't, because we can't measure what he would have done.

But that's the great thing about the HOF, there is no statistical criteria.

I think there is easy justification leaving a guy like Bonds out of the Hall of Fame. There's also easy justification to let him in.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by jazzrack

should point out that the hall of fame is not a MLB organization

But it would surely seem odd for someone to have disgraced himself and gotten himself banned from the sport to then appear in that sport's Hall of Fame, wouldn't it?

[The Game]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

I don't think that anyone who has admitted to or been caught using steroids/HGH should be refused induction based off of that use. If they fit the criteria for entering the Hall then they should be in. The main reason is because "How do we know how much impact those things actually had on a season or career?" How many of Bonds 73 homeruns in 2001 would he have not hit? How many of his 762 home runs would he have not hit? How do you measure it?

We can says, "He wouldn't hold either record if he weren't juiced up," but can we prove it? There's a lot of evidence that points to him not being able to break either record, but we cannot definitively say that he wouldn't, because we can't measure what he would have done.

about 26 of those 73. 200 of those 755. He still would have had 500 HR and at worst still would have been the only 400-400 guy.

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by The Game

White was just added this year. Cravath oddly enough i am not sure i have ever heard of before but in 6 of his final 8 season he led the NL in HR. Where did his 119 career HR rank him in 1920 when he retired? Had he played more his 1st 4 years he would have been closer to 1500 hits vs 1134 would have more of a chance. but I can't seem to find his HR ranks on an all time list to start the 1921 season. Was he the 1st true power hitter?

When Babe Ruth became the All-Time HR leader, it was Cravath that he surpassed.

His limited playing time was the result of the unfriendly structure in place for players, not because he "needed to develop" in the minors.

The HOF gets it right with Roy Campanella, who also debuted at the age of 26 and had 1161 career hits. Though not a barrier of color, Cravath's career stats were reduced by an unfair institutional barrier that no longer exists and his career numbers should be looked at with that in mind.

All accounts of Cravath that I have ever viewed (his Wiki page does give a real good nutshell of his life in a quick shot) is that he was a man of exemplary character.

I get the pick of Deacon White by the Vet Committee, but Cravath is definitely deserving. IMO he should have been in long ago.

[John Madden]

Harry Stovey was another unsung hero as well. When he retired in 1893, his 122 HR and 509 SB were both all-time marks.

[John Madden]

Cravath never held the all-time HR mark. Roger Conner passed Stovey in 1895, and held the mark until Ruth broke it in 1921.

[VanillaGorilla]

You are correct. Cravath's mark was for HR in the 20th Century. I was remiss in not noting that.

[abailey3313]

No one.

To me, the problem with stripping players of individual accolades (there seems to be a lot of sentiment that Braun and A-Rod's MVPs should be stripped, Bonds' record should have an asterisk, etc) is that it assumes fans are stupid. At least that's how it makes me feel.

The Hall of Fame should be, in my mind, a museum of baseball's history. It should highlight the good without trying to disguise the bad because the bad, whether anyone likes it or not, is a permanent part of history. Stripping awards, blocking people from induction, and all that kind of stuff is like ripping chapters out of the middle of a book. It breaks the narrative. People at large are smart enough to look at Barry Bonds' plaque and draw their own conclusions the same way they're smart enough to read a book start to finish and decide what they thought was well-written, what wasn't, and what events were necessary or not.

[Goody]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

We can says, "He wouldn't hold either record if he weren't juiced up," but can we prove it? There's a lot of evidence that points to him not being able to break either record, but we cannot definitively say that he wouldn't, because we can't measure what he would have done.

Steroids help you recover from injury faster. So there's one guy he statistically left in the dust due to being juiced up. How many home runs might Ken Griffey Jr. have hit if he had stayed reasonably healthy? - ESPN

If he does end up going in, I hope it is long after Griffey does.

[swampdragon]

If I was in charge of booting people out, the first thing I'd do is take a long look at all of the teammates of Frankie Frisch who got in when Frisch was on the Veterans' Committee. Some of them belong, but most of them don't.

[MorseMoose]

Originally Posted by abailey3313

No one.

To me, the problem with stripping players of individual accolades (there seems to be a lot of sentiment that Braun and A-Rod's MVPs should be stripped, Bonds' record should have an asterisk, etc) is that it assumes fans are stupid. At least that's how it makes me feel.

The Hall of Fame should be, in my mind, a museum of baseball's history. It should highlight the good without trying to disguise the bad because the bad, whether anyone likes it or not, is a permanent part of history. Stripping awards, blocking people from induction, and all that kind of stuff is like ripping chapters out of the middle of a book. It breaks the narrative. People at large are smart enough to look at Barry Bonds' plaque and draw their own conclusions the same way they're smart enough to read a book start to finish and decide what they thought was well-written, what wasn't, and what events were necessary or not.

Yes, but...history gets lost. In 100 years, will we remember that Rafael Palmeiro took roids? He'll be in the books, but he's a minor player now...what will he be in 100 years?

[MorseMoose]

Originally Posted by abailey3313

No one.

To me, the problem with stripping players of individual accolades (there seems to be a lot of sentiment that Braun and A-Rod's MVPs should be stripped, Bonds' record should have an asterisk, etc) is that it assumes fans are stupid. At least that's how it makes me feel.

The Hall of Fame should be, in my mind, a museum of baseball's history. It should highlight the good without trying to disguise the bad because the bad, whether anyone likes it or not, is a permanent part of history. Stripping awards, blocking people from induction, and all that kind of stuff is like ripping chapters out of the middle of a book. It breaks the narrative. People at large are smart enough to look at Barry Bonds' plaque and draw their own conclusions the same way they're smart enough to read a book start to finish and decide what they thought was well-written, what wasn't, and what events were necessary or not.

Yes, but...history gets lost. In 100 years, will we remember that Rafael Palmeiro took roids? He'll be in the books, but he's a minor player now...what will he be in 100 years?

[Left-handed Badger]

1890s Tommy McCarthy, essentially just a good corner OF, and a bit underwhelming for a HOFer.

Freddie Lindstrom is #2.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by MorseMoose

Yes, but...history gets lost. In 100 years, will we remember that Rafael Palmeiro took roids? He'll be in the books, but he's a minor player now...what will he be in 100 years?

Maybe not Palmeiro, but Bonds, Clemens, McGuire, etc? Yes. If they were put into the Hall because they put up numbers deserving of going into the Hall (which they have) people will remember that, despite those numbers and despite being in the Hall because of those numbers, they were cheaters during an age of cheating.