Never Too Early to Check:

[Seven]

Originally Posted by jayshum

I agree with you about the hypocrisy of Selig being inducted and the PED players not being. For Anson, it's harder because you can't easily apply today's accepted behavior with what was considered acceptable back in his time. He wasn't the only one responsible for baseball being segregated even though he certainly played a significant part.

Jay,

I think I worded it poorly on my part, I'm going to leave my original post. What I was trying to say was that I do think Anson should be in the Hall of Fame. He statistically is a Hall of Famer. He was a pioneer of the game. Statistically speaking, Clemens, Bonds, Rodriguez, etc. All belong as well.

I can't for the life of me understand someone attempting to take the moral high ground argument when it comes to the PED users, but also simultaneously be okay with players like Anson being in the Hall of Fame.

Hope this clarifies things.

James

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Seven

Jay,

I think I worded it poorly on my part, I'm going to leave my original post. What I was trying to say was that I do think Anson should be in the Hall of Fame. He statistically is a Hall of Famer. He was a pioneer of the game. Statistically speaking, Clemens, Bonds, Rodriguez, etc. All belong as well.

I can't for the life of me understand someone attempting to take the moral high ground argument when it comes to the PED users, but also simultaneously be okay with players like Anson being in the Hall of Fame.

Hope this clarifies things.

James

James, I understood what you were saying in your first post. There are people who think players like Anson should be removed from the Hall of Fame as well as Commissioner Landis and others who's morals don't fit the present even though they may not have been that far from the norm in their own time.

I don't see wanting to keep people out of the Hall now for PEDs just because people like Anson are already in as being hypocritical because they're from different eras and what was considered acceptable in Anson's time is a lot different from now. I see more of a problem with Selig being in (as you said) because he was part of the same era as Bonds, McGwire, etc and clearly had something to do with PED usage being allowed to continue for as long as it did so if the players are to be punished with exclusion then he should be as well.

[mainemule]

CC looking like a first ballot inductee and Schilling not being in is ridiculous. CC only exceeds him in games, wins and IP. He does have one Cy. Schilling's post season numbers and results greatly exceed CCs.

I deplore most of Schilling's post career behaviors but his on field results make him worthy.

I also would like Jeff Kent to be given a better look if Chase Utley is gathering steam.

[Mike D.]

Yes, Schilling is a world-class knob, but to date that's not been enough to keep anyone else out of the Hall of Fame (it's PED's, gambling, and domestic abuse to date). He should have been voted in by the writers.

With the committees, who knows when he'll get on a ballot (could be as early as next year) and when he does, who he'll be on with and will he get elected.

Sabathia and Schilling did overlap by a few years, but Schilling's debut was 13 years before Sabathia, making them sort of a different generation of pitchers. Going forward, what a Hall of Fame starting pitcher looks like is going to be really hard to figure out!

I think both Kent and Utley belong. Not sure why Kent didn't get that much love on the ballot.

[gunboat82]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Yes, Schilling is a world-class knob, but to date that's not been enough to keep anyone else out of the Hall of Fame (it's PED's, gambling, and domestic abuse to date). He should have been voted in by the writers.

With the committees, who knows when he'll get on a ballot (could be as early as next year) and when he does, who he'll be on with and will he get elected.

Sabathia and Schilling did overlap by a few years, but Schilling's debut was 13 years before Sabathia, making them sort of a different generation of pitchers. Going forward, what a Hall of Fame starting pitcher looks like is going to be really hard to figure out!

I think both Kent and Utley belong. Not sure why Kent didn't get that much love on the ballot.

Kent also had a reputation for being a world-class knob. No comment on whether it's deserved or not... but he was widely reviled as a human. So if he doesn't get in, he might test your theory that Schilling is the only one disqualified for knobbery.

[mainemule]

Schilling won the Roberto Clemente award and was well known to be a supporter of our troops.

His "knobdom," including saying he didn't want to be elected, certainly ruined his chances.

I can't comment on Kent's reputation.

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by mainemule

Schilling won the Roberto Clemente award and was well known to be a supporter of our troops.

His "knobdom," including saying he didn't want to be elected, certainly ruined his chances.

I can't comment on Kent's reputation.

Some of the knobish things he did was borrow 10's of millions from the state of RI to move him company there and almost immediately run it into the ground, share memes about murdering journalists, and break the news that Tim Wakefield had cancer days before his death.

But nobody is all good or all bad....I believe he did some significant fundraising for cancer research and did support our troops.

In my mind, he falls into the Pete Rose camp of being his own worse enemy. Like, if he'd literally said nothing after his 9th year on the ballot, I'm sure he'd have been elected in this 10th and final year. But instead he chose to disparage the voters and say he didn't want to get elected.

So, should he be in the Hall of Fame? Absolutely. Is he easy to feel bad for? Not so much.

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by gunboat82

Kent also had a reputation for being a world-class knob. No comment on whether it's deserved or not... but he was widely reviled as a human. So if he doesn't get in, he might test your theory that Schilling is the only one disqualified for knobbery.

Was he the one that got hurt on a motorcycle and almost got his contract canceled?

Kent played longer and had more power. Utley had probably a more all-around peak and was a better baserunner. I can't speak to their defense, although I think I remember Kent having a reputation as a below-average second baseman.

[gunboat82]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Was he the one that got hurt on a motorcycle and almost got his contract canceled?

Kent played longer and had more power. Utley had probably a more all-around peak and was a better baserunner. I can't speak to their defense, although I think I remember Kent having a reputation as a below-average second baseman.

Yes, he claimed he injured himself because he fell of his truck while washing it. He was also notorious for being an a-hole to teammates and media, he was a mediocre defender, and he put up his offensive numbers during the steroid era, when numbers were up across baseball. That's probably enough to keep him out.