Andre Dawson Elected to HOF; Alomar Falls Short...

[BBTV]

I think Dawson and Blyleven should have gotten in. I am torn however on the first ballot voting. I agree with the statement that if you are a Hall of Famer, you are a Hall of Famer, regardless of year. That being said, i do think there is some sort of justification for not putting in someone on the first ballot unless they are truly a special player.

I am completely against the people who will NOT vote for someone the first year the are eligible though.

These two statements kind of contradict each other, no?

I'm totally 100% against your first statement. If there's some special club for first-ballot HOFers, then the HOF needs to make a special wing called "Super HOF", and then the writers can vote for Super HOF and regular HOF. As long as it's just one HOF, then you're either good enough or you're not. It's pretty simple. In cases where a guy gets left out for some reason, there's always the Veterans' committee (they still have that, right?) that can clean up that mistake.

now lets just get Pete Rose in the Hall finally!

This, however, I do agree with. He's suspended from baseball. The HOF is simply a museum, and his standing with MLB should have no bearing on his eligibility to be enshrined in a museum. I understand that the Hall did sign an agreement with MLB to honor their suspensions, but IMO that's just stupid.

It's a museum that tells the story of the game, and that story isn't always a pretty one. Put him in, but mention on his plaque that he was suspended for life, and explain what for. That's a better lesson for the kids than just hiding him and pretending that he never existed.

[ESTONES6]

I think Dawson and Blyleven should have gotten in. I am torn however on the first ballot voting. I agree with the statement that if you are a Hall of Famer, you are a Hall of Famer, regardless of year. That being said, i do think there is some sort of justification for not putting in someone on the first ballot unless they are truly a special player.

I am completely against the people who will NOT vote for someone the first year the are eligible though.

These two statements kind of contradict each other, no?

I'm totally 100% against your first statement. If there's some special club for first-ballot HOFers, then the HOF needs to make a special wing called "Super HOF", and then the writers can vote for Super HOF and regular HOF. As long as it's just one HOF, then you're either good enough or you're not. It's pretty simple. In cases where a guy gets left out for some reason, there's always the Veterans' committee (they still have that, right?) that can clean up that mistake.

Like i said, i understand how people feel about the "first ballot HOF." Like, i "get it." But i am also see the same as you... if you are HOF, you are HOF, no matter what.

But there are some people who will NOT vote for a person just because its his first time. They won't even look at his stats or career because its his first time on the ballot... i don't like that idea.

[ESTONES6]

Who are you, The Patron Saint of Lost Causes? Pete Rose, Shoeless Joe, Cleveland sports???

Shoeless Joe and Pete Rose were amazing players. I respect what they did on the field. As for the betting, i have a hard time casting stones when i have committed the same sins... know what i mean? I still think they deserve it.

As for Cleveland sports, why do you gotta go there? Don't you know what they say about us Clevelanders? We're sadomasochists... we love the pain our sports' teams bring us. It's not called Believe-land for no reason. Even if we believe in hopelessness.

But come on, you don't see me dogging you for "Jigga"

So you were paid to throw a World Series as a player and then later in your career as a major league manager you bet on your own team? Because unless you've committed those "same sins" then no, I don't "know what you mean."

Look, I get the sentiment and there's no doubt that Rose and Jackson were two of the all time greats. They both had hall of fame careers. There's just that one little problem; you cannot get paid to throw a game or series and you cannot gamble on baseball while playing or managing. All their greatness does not outweigh the fact that while playing, they -ed up in the worst possible way. The rules are the rules. They don't change based on the career you had before you broke them.

And here's a little free advice for you rookie. I think you might be better off leaving well enough alone with Jigga. Trust me on this one.

lol you took that too literally. I mean i've bet on baseball (legally of course). But i kind of subscribe to the old feeling that if you look at Shoeless Joe's stats, you can't really say he TRIED to throw the WS.

For Pete Rose, from what i can remember, i think they said they have no solid evidence that Rose bet against the Reds, but there is the possibility that he could have.

I don't know. I try to see both sides of the argument in every conversation or debate... and i can def see the support for both sides.

[Bronxmet]

I expected that Alomar and Blyleven would barely miss the HOF, but I'm shocked that Larkin and Edgar Martinez received less votes than I expected. I understand Edgar would get held back because he was a Designated Hitter, but Larkin, why?

[The_Admiral]

For Pete Rose, from what i can remember, i think they said they have no solid evidence that Rose bet against the Reds, but there is the possibility that he could have.

HE ADMITTED THAT HE DID

[NJTank]

I expected that Alomar and Blyleven would barely miss the HOF, but I'm shocked that Larkin and Edgar Martinez received less votes than I expected. I understand Edgar would get held back because he was a Designated Hitter, but Larkin, why?

Yeah I agree, Larkin was a class act too.

[infrared41]

For Pete Rose, from what i can remember, i think they said they have no solid evidence that Rose bet against the Reds, but there is the possibility that he could have.

HE ADMITTED THAT HE DID

Why are they always Cleveland fans?

Imagine watching or listening to local talk shows and 95% of the calls sound just like that.

[ESTONES6]

For Pete Rose, from what i can remember, i think they said they have no solid evidence that Rose bet against the Reds, but there is the possibility that he could have.

HE ADMITTED THAT HE DID

So did Joe Jackson. But my guess is that won't matter either.

Why are they always Cleveland fans?

Imagine watching or listening to local talk shows and 95% of the calls sound just like that.

I said i'm not sure, thats why i'm asking. did he admit to betting AGAINST the Reds... or just betting on the game(s)?

[Gary]

For Pete Rose, from what i can remember, i think they said they have no solid evidence that Rose bet against the Reds, but there is the possibility that he could have.

HE ADMITTED THAT HE DID

So did Joe Jackson. But my guess is that won't matter either.

Why are they always Cleveland fans?

Imagine watching or listening to local talk shows and 95% of the calls sound just like that.

I said i'm not sure, thats why i'm asking. did he admit to betting AGAINST the Reds... or just betting on the game(s)?

Should it matter? He admitted to betting on the game while he was a Manager in basebal which in my eyes and most of the country means he cheated the game itself. As long as he is alive he should not be allowed into the Hall of Fame. He made his bed and he has to lie in it.

[infrared41]

Who are you, The Patron Saint of Lost Causes? Pete Rose, Shoeless Joe, Cleveland sports???

Shoeless Joe and Pete Rose were amazing players. I respect what they did on the field. As for the betting, i have a hard time casting stones when i have committed the same sins... know what i mean? I still think they deserve it.

As for Cleveland sports, why do you gotta go there? Don't you know what they say about us Clevelanders? We're sadomasochists... we love the pain our sports' teams bring us. It's not called Believe-land for no reason. Even if we believe in hopelessness.

But come on, you don't see me dogging you for "Jigga"

So you were paid to throw a World Series as a player and then later in your career as a major league manager you bet on your own team? Because unless you've committed those "same sins" then no, I don't "know what you mean."

Look, I get the sentiment and there's no doubt that Rose and Jackson were two of the all time greats. They both had hall of fame careers. There's just that one little problem; you cannot get paid to throw a game or series and you cannot gamble on baseball while playing or managing. All their greatness does not outweigh the fact that while playing, they -ed up in the worst possible way. The rules are the rules. They don't change based on the career you had before you broke them.

And here's a little free advice for you rookie. I think you might be better off leaving well enough alone with Jigga. Trust me on this one.

lol you took that too literally. I mean i've bet on baseball (legally of course). But i kind of subscribe to the old feeling that if you look at Shoeless Joe's stats, you can't really say he TRIED to throw the WS.

For Pete Rose, from what i can remember, i think they said they have no solid evidence that Rose bet against the Reds, but there is the possibility that he could have.

I don't know. I try to see both sides of the argument in every conversation or debate... and i can def see the support for both sides.

No. You said you've "committed the same sins." Giving away your money to the local bookie is in no way the same thing as fixing a World Series or betting on baseball while employed by MLB. There is a slight difference.

And here's another piece of free advice. We type the full word in these parts chief. You'll save yourself a lot of misery by getting into the habit right away. Again, trust me on this one.

[ESTONES6]

Who are you, The Patron Saint of Lost Causes? Pete Rose, Shoeless Joe, Cleveland sports???

Shoeless Joe and Pete Rose were amazing players. I respect what they did on the field. As for the betting, i have a hard time casting stones when i have committed the same sins... know what i mean? I still think they deserve it.

As for Cleveland sports, why do you gotta go there? Don't you know what they say about us Clevelanders? We're sadomasochists... we love the pain our sports' teams bring us. It's not called Believe-land for no reason. Even if we believe in hopelessness.

But come on, you don't see me dogging you for "Jigga"

So you were paid to throw a World Series as a player and then later in your career as a major league manager you bet on your own team? Because unless you've committed those "same sins" then no, I don't "know what you mean."

Look, I get the sentiment and there's no doubt that Rose and Jackson were two of the all time greats. They both had hall of fame careers. There's just that one little problem; you cannot get paid to throw a game or series and you cannot gamble on baseball while playing or managing. All their greatness does not outweigh the fact that while playing, they -ed up in the worst possible way. The rules are the rules. They don't change based on the career you had before you broke them.

And here's a little free advice for you rookie. I think you might be better off leaving well enough alone with Jigga. Trust me on this one.

lol you took that too literally. I mean i've bet on baseball (legally of course). But i kind of subscribe to the old feeling that if you look at Shoeless Joe's stats, you can't really say he TRIED to throw the WS.

For Pete Rose, from what i can remember, i think they said they have no solid evidence that Rose bet against the Reds, but there is the possibility that he could have.

I don't know. I try to see both sides of the argument in every conversation or debate... and i can def see the support for both sides.

No. You said you've "committed the same sins." Giving away your money to the local bookie is in no way the same thing as fixing a World Series or betting on baseball while employed by MLB. There is a slight difference.

And here's another piece of free advice. We type the full word in these parts chief. You'll save yourself a lot of misery by getting into the habit right away. Again, trust me on this one.

Sorry, i shortened one word. i wasn't aware it was in the forum rules and regulations. it was only ONE word.

as for the betting, even if he agreed to rig the WS... it is hard to say that he was trying to rig it based on his stats. As for the sins... its betting... i've bet. thats the "sin" i was referring to. Was it poor judgment on his part? Absolutely. Like i said, i can see the argument for both sides... getting him in or keeping him out. I understand both sides. I sort of feel a lot of people don't look at both sides.

That's all i was trying to say. No need to get so heated and malicious.

[Gary]

Who are you, The Patron Saint of Lost Causes? Pete Rose, Shoeless Joe, Cleveland sports???

Shoeless Joe and Pete Rose were amazing players. I respect what they did on the field. As for the betting, i have a hard time casting stones when i have committed the same sins... know what i mean? I still think they deserve it.

As for Cleveland sports, why do you gotta go there? Don't you know what they say about us Clevelanders? We're sadomasochists... we love the pain our sports' teams bring us. It's not called Believe-land for no reason. Even if we believe in hopelessness.

But come on, you don't see me dogging you for "Jigga"

So you were paid to throw a World Series as a player and then later in your career as a major league manager you bet on your own team? Because unless you've committed those "same sins" then no, I don't "know what you mean."

Look, I get the sentiment and there's no doubt that Rose and Jackson were two of the all time greats. They both had hall of fame careers. There's just that one little problem; you cannot get paid to throw a game or series and you cannot gamble on baseball while playing or managing. All their greatness does not outweigh the fact that while playing, they -ed up in the worst possible way. The rules are the rules. They don't change based on the career you had before you broke them.

And here's a little free advice for you rookie. I think you might be better off leaving well enough alone with Jigga. Trust me on this one.

lol you took that too literally. I mean i've bet on baseball (legally of course). But i kind of subscribe to the old feeling that if you look at Shoeless Joe's stats, you can't really say he TRIED to throw the WS.

For Pete Rose, from what i can remember, i think they said they have no solid evidence that Rose bet against the Reds, but there is the possibility that he could have.

I don't know. I try to see both sides of the argument in every conversation or debate... and i can def see the support for both sides.

No. You said you've "committed the same sins." Giving away your money to the local bookie is in no way the same thing as fixing a World Series or betting on baseball while employed by MLB. There is a slight difference.

And here's another piece of free advice. We type the full word in these parts chief. You'll save yourself a lot of misery by getting into the habit right away. Again, trust me on this one.

Sorry, i shortened one word. i wasn't aware it was in the forum rules and regulations. it was only ONE word.

as for the betting, even if he agreed to rig the WS... it is hard to say that he was trying to rig it based on his stats. As for the sins... its betting... i've bet. thats the "sin" i was referring to. Was it poor judgment on his part? Absolutely. Like i said, i can see the argument for both sides... getting him in or keeping him out. I understand both sides. I sort of feel a lot of people don't look at both sides.

That's all i was trying to say. No need to get so heated and malicious.

Sure we've all bet, friendly bets, but he bet on baseball while still in the game which is the most cardinal sin in all of sports. Which is a bannabale offense. That is the worst thing to do. Think of it like stealing $1,000 from your job and see what happens to you the next day when you get caught, you'll be escorted out of your work like a common criminal and will be blackballed from places that you had a chance of working before

[ESTONES6]

i agree. like i said, i can see both sides and i can respect both sides of the argument. just how you guys feels they shouldn't be in, i feel they should. its always good to have varying opinions.

[Jimmy!]

Rose, Jackson, Weaver, and the rest of the Black Sox forever tainted their integrity as players. They bet on baseball. Intentions don't matter. And WHEN you bet on baseball, people will forever wonder how many times the player in question played on the level, threw a game, or eased off a bit to win a wager.

Getting back on track...

As for falling short, how a guy who has 60 career shutouts (9th all time), which is more than Glavine and Mussina have complete games, more than 3700 strikeouts, and an ERA around 3.3 DOESN'T make it in is beyond me. Bert "Be Home" Blyleven should be in the HOF.

[infrared41]

Sorry, i shortened one word. i wasn't aware it was in the forum rules and regulations. it was only ONE word.

as for the betting, even if he agreed to rig the WS... it is hard to say that he was trying to rig it based on his stats. As for the sins... its betting... i've bet. thats the "sin" i was referring to. Was it poor judgment on his part? Absolutely. Like i said, i can see the argument for both sides... getting him in or keeping him out. I understand both sides. I sort of feel a lot of people don't look at both sides.

That's all i was trying to say. No need to get so heated and malicious.

This is exactly what I was talking about in the other thread. If you think that was heated and malicious you're in for a real shock when someone actually does go "heated and malicious" on you. Give it some time dude. Get familiar with the way this place works before you start letting your feelings get hurt.

On topic, the statement in bold is an example of why you're catching so much flack. You make statements like that and people are going to call you on them. It's not "hard to say he was trying to rig it" because he admitted he rigged it. He took the money. What he hit after he took the money doesn't matter. Jackson agreed to throw The World Series. Anything after that is irrelevant.

And hang in there. You'll get the hang of this place.

[The_Admiral]

Yeah, Estones seems like a good guy. I misread his name as "Estonia."

So shall Dawson go in as an Expo or as a Cub? My head says he'll be a Montrealer. Not only were his biggest years in Montreal, but his career was defined by playing there. If not for his knees getting torn up on awful carpet, he could've been even better.

[infrared41]

Yeah, Estones seems like a good guy. I misread his name as "Estonia."

So shall Dawson go in as an Expo or as a Cub? My head says he'll be a Montrealer. Not only were his biggest years in Montreal, but his career was defined by playing there. If not for his knees getting torn up on awful carpet, he could've been even better.

Hawk has to go in as an Expo. I met Andre Dawson a few years ago. I said "Hawk they need to put you in the hall." He said "ain't nuthin' I can do about that." He was pretty cool. Good for him that the people who could do something about it finally did.

[Jigga]

It's no longer up to the player, it's up to "The Hall" now, right? If that's the case, he MUST go in as an Expo.

[The_Admiral]

He had a pretty nice run as a Cub, but he had ten years in Montreal, so there you go.

[Jimmy!]

If the writers screw Blyleven out of the HOF, watch the HOF muck this up and put him in as a Marlin. It's a conspiracy, man!