Quote:
Originally Posted by dealme
I've never understood why the HOF and its voters seem to feel a need to vote people in every year. If there wasn't an induction every year, it would be more of an event in the years that there was.
I am of the opinion that the Hall is watered down as it is, and I don't grasp the concept that because a candidate only has X years left on the ballot, he's somehow more worthy of inclusion. In my opinion, Raines falls into this category. He was certainly a good ballplayer, but is he now more worthy of induction simply because he's about to drop off of the ballot? I also thought that Ron Santo's induction was a slap in the face (to Santo). It's as if the voters felt that since he had passed, he somehow became more worthy of induction.
I think that if there is any question as to whether a player should be in the Hall (be it his on-field performance, PEDs, criminal record, etc.), then he probably shouldn't be in the Hall. The only way this group should get into the Hall is the same way that most of us do: buy a ticket.  |
Santo's induction was a sad moment for me because, like you say, he apparently got more of a nod after death and nobody would have been more grateful than Ron to have been part of that celebration. Selig is knocked out for me based on his poor handling of ped's early on and also not fond of using the public to subsidize stadiums that no longer have affordable ticket pricing. However, he's been much better than most of his predecessors. The players on this ballet are in no way contenders in my opinion. I would like to see the HOF get back on a more elite track. *I'm never fond of armchair generals talking to me about their opinion of war/combat as there is only one way to truly have an opinion on it. Not that sports is anything comparable, but I do rely on the veterans committee to guide my opinion since I've never been more than a baseball spectator.