Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from pri360. Show pri360's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?:
    I'm putting Edgar in, i'm putting Ortiz in, i'm putting Harold Baines in too. I will advocate the DH Party.
    Posted by dannycater
    Just so I understand, is everyone on this board of the mind that Ortiz's positive test on league wide anonymous testing a non-issue?
    To me, thats the biggest reason he won't get in ... not because he's a DH.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    I don't think Ortiz will be affected by that. He's never been suspended and he's still playing and been an effective hitter, almost reborn the past few seasons.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from tomnev. Show tomnev's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?:
    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers? : Just so I understand, is everyone on this board of the mind that Ortiz's positive test on league wide anonymous testing a non-issue? To me, thats the biggest reason he won't get in ... not because he's a DH.
    Posted by pri360


    there seems to be alot of subjects being posted today that drive me crazy and this is another one of them.....a) the tests were anonymous and agreed not to be used vs the players....b) Ortiz was tested numerous other times and passed them all.....c) No Medical test is 100% accurate...without specific Data....but jsut through some Google searches....alot talk of being 99% accurate.....so that would mean of the 1200 players tested.....12 of the tests were wrong. I am not saying whether I thinnk Ortiz did or didnt use Steroids or even whether his #'s will ne HOF caliber, but if a voter thinks they are worthy, to use that one anonymous test result...ignore all the other tests....and rely on inuendo and suspicion is irresponsible at best.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    Palmeiro should be in the Hall, but he "lied" to Congress, and that's sad because his career numbers, steroids or not, are well beyond what is needed to be there.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    Put the players in based on performance (enhanced or otherwise). Enough about "judging" players. What kind of hall is it anyway that doesn't have the all-time hits leader...a joke.
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    There are media members on the Hall voting board that have held grudges v. certain players, others who flat out refuse to vote for people based often on heresay, not the truth.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    No, apparently, Ted, all pitchers were once shortstops who could hit and all are superior fielders in superior shape. But DHs, see they aren't in good shape, and they can't field (although like they have control over the manager's use of the position), and even if they hit like Hall of Famers, no, they can't go in. The logic is silly at best, it's also very much holding on to this grand theory that MLB hasn't adapted in the past 40 years. The rules have changed, the position exists, it's an important position, and it should be held with the same regard as any other when it comes to HOF voting.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    One of these days the NL will adopt the DH. That will kill a lot of people who clamour to watch pitchers strike out on 3 pitches or not take a swing or simply try to bunt badly with 2 strikes. It's basically ugly to watch. High Schools use the DH, Colleges use the DH, international teams use the DH, the AL uses the DH, the all-star game uses the DH, the WS uses the DH in certain parks. It's part of the national pasttime, but apparently not enough for "purists."...pathetic. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from tomnev. Show tomnev's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?:
    Palmeiro should be in the Hall, but he "lied" to Congress, and that's sad because his career numbers, steroids or not, are well beyond what is needed to be there.
    Posted by dannycater


    Danny....I agree it is sad....but again....Palmeiro failed on out 20+ tests.....denied ever knowingly using Steroids.....claimed he could have gotten a tainted B12 shot from Tejeda, who says he got the B12 from the DR which has no apprent FDA....all seemingly unlikely, but in a court of law, probably not enough to convict. Add to the fact that no one could possibly quantify the effect Steroids had on the numbers these players produced and if they were actually on an even playing field with pitchers and fielders also on Steroids....I think writers are going to have to get passed it.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?:
    Put the players in based on performance (enhanced or otherwise). Enough about "judging" players. What kind of hall is it anyway that doesn't have the all-time hits leader...a joke.
    Posted by dannycater


    Rose broke the golden rule--don't gamble on MLB.  He even bet on games his team played.  And then he lied about it.  For years.  If he gets in, it should be after he dies.  Shoeless Joe Jackson was a great player who did something similar, and was never allowed back, let alone considered for the HOF. 

    Guys using drugs is a tougher call, but I think the HOF committee will err on the side of caution.  Fine with me. 

    Baseball has a lot of history, most of it good.  Black Sox scandal, not good.  Not integrating MLB, also not good.  But finally integrating MLB in 1947, a full year before Truman integrated the armed services, pretty good.  Ken Burns series on MLB, very good.  Expansion to 30 teams, good. Expansion of playoffs, good. Trying to balance things for the smaller market teams, good. Drug scandal, horrible, and mostly the fault of MLBPA. A sport that goes back well into the 19th century, terrific. That it is worthy of being called the national pastime, also terrific (although there are times it is less worthy). 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?:
    You guys defending the DH keep ignoring my basic point.  Please don't tell me they were in great shape or once fielded adequately.  Tell me how many games they played in which they went out to the field every single inning to man a fielding position instead of sitting in the dugout.  I delighted to see that the HOF voters appear to agree with me and not you. 
    Posted by maxbialystock

    If you eliminate the DH on that basis, then to remain consistent you must eliminate the pitcher -- especially in the American League.

    Last year, Justin Verlander appeared in 34 of Detroit's 162 games (21 percent). He had four at-bats. Yet he was the American League MVP.

    Mariano Rivera hasn't pitched more than 80 innings (the equivalent of nine games) in a season since becoming the Yankees' closer. Yet he's a first-ballot Hall of Famer.

    To close the door on any position and say they're not baseball players would be wrong.


     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?:
    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers? : If you eliminate the DH on that basis, then to remain consistent you must eliminate the pitcher -- especially in the American League. Last year, Justin Verlander appeared in 34 of Detroit's 162 games (21 percent). He had four at-bats. Yet he was the American League MVP. Mariano Rivera hasn't pitched more than 80 innings (the equivalent of nine games) in a season since becoming the Yankees' closer. Yet he's a first-ballot Hall of Famer. To close the door on any position and say they're not baseball players would be wrong.
    Posted by LloydDobler
    \

    I remember the days when you had to throw over 120 Innings a year to be closer and when you had to actually earn your Saves.  Those guys are HOF'ers; today's coddled "closers" are not.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?:
    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers? : If you eliminate the DH on that basis, then to remain consistent you must eliminate the pitcher -- especially in the American League. Last year, Justin Verlander appeared in 34 of Detroit's 162 games (21 percent). He had four at-bats. Yet he was the American League MVP. Mariano Rivera hasn't pitched more than 80 innings (the equivalent of nine games) in a season since becoming the Yankees' closer. Yet he's a first-ballot Hall of Famer. To close the door on any position and say they're not baseball players would be wrong.
    Posted by LloydDobler


    I discussed pitchers at length.  To recap:  1) hardest skill in baseball; 2) work harder than any position player when they pitch, so much harder they can only pitch every fifth day; 3) so important that every MLB team carries 12 pitchers to 13 position players.  No team has ever carried two DH's.  In fact, some team in the AL don't even carry one, but move it around depending on who's pitching, who needs a break, etc. 

    DH's don't have to "work" at all.  They sit in the dugout and go out to hit on average 4 times a game.  Some of them, maybe even most of them, stay in pretty good shape, but they never, ever have to worry about running out of gas, getting tired, etc.  Starting pitchers worry about that all the time, and even some relievers do. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?:
    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers? : I discussed pitchers at length.  To recap:  1) hardest skill in baseball; 2) work harder than any position player when they pitch, so much harder they can only pitch every fifth day; 3) so important that every MLB team carries 12 pitchers to 13 position players.  No team has ever carried two DH's.  In fact, some team in the AL don't even carry one, but move it around depending on who's pitching, who needs a break, etc.  DH's don't have to "work" at all.  They sit in the dugout and go out to hit on average 4 times a game.  Some of them, maybe even most of them, stay in pretty good shape, but they never, ever have to worry about running out of gas, getting tired, etc.  Starting pitchers worry about that all the time, and even some relievers do. 
    Posted by maxbialystock

    I'd say hitting a 98 mph fastball on the corner of the plate or a cutter that rolls off the table is the hardest skill in baseball. And the catcher works every bit as hard, which is why their careers are generally shorter.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?:
    Palmeiro should be in the Hall, but he "lied" to Congress, and that's sad because his career numbers, steroids or not, are well beyond what is needed to be there.
    Posted by dannycater


    Ha. Right. You can only lie to Congress if your a congressman, or an Attorney General or the prez.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    right, harv, and that's why it's become a joke to scrutinize steroid players who were following the lead so much so that there were more than 50 percent using during the height of the era. That was how some even got a MLB job-hit more homers, or enough to hold their spot on a roster. But let's play holier than thou and judge everyone the same. Except Gaylord Perry cheated, used illegal substance on the ball itself, free pass. Tons of players who gambled during the 1910s,1920s,1930s,1940s...free pass. But today, in political correct USofA, now it's 1984esque judgment day. You are guilty of crimes against the state of baseball. You are not Hall worthy...yeah, right.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    Put Rose, Palmeiro in right now, and follow up with Edgar. Hell, remove Rabbit Maranville too. Let's take out some of these mediocre HOFers.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?:
    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers? : I'd say hitting a 98 mph fastball on the corner of the plate or a cutter that rolls off the table is the hardest skill in baseball. And the catcher works every bit as hard, which is why their careers are generally shorter.
    Posted by LloydDobler


    Actually, almost no hitters can hit the 98 mph fast ball on the corner, but they don't have to because there are no pitchers who can consistently throw that pitch, and that's even assuming the umpire will call a strike which more and more he won't.  No, today all a hitter has to be able to hit is something near the middle of the plate, and he only has to do it every so often and lots of times against pitchers who are throwing 91 mph heat. 
     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from WilcyMoore. Show WilcyMoore's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?:
    In Response to Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers? : The question should be , is if the DH was not available, would the Edgar Martinez's offensive output been enough that the Mariners would have played him at 1B.....without a doubt....and if that was the case, no matter how average he had been in the field....would the offensive numbers he put up be enough to make him Hall Worthy....considering that Edgar has 300+ HRS, 1200+ RBIs and over a .300 BA and of the other guys who have done that.....15 are in the Hall.....4 are Active and probably Hall bound(Steroids aside).....AROD, CHipper, Pujols, and Helton....6 more are inactive, Manny, Frank Thomas, Bagwell, Piazza, Larry Walker and Moises Alou....of those 6(again Roids aside)....other than Alou, I guarantee they are getting in the Hall or someone is arguing hard they should be......so since it wasnt Edgars fault the option of DH was there and he didnt get to play an Average 1B or Weak 3B.....why should he not be considered? 
    Posted by tomnev
     

    Part of the problem with this type of debate is that we cannot "assume" that Edgar Martinez would have put up the numbers he did if he had played a position throughout his career or had been in the NL where he would have had to play one whether he could or not.   He would have much more susceptible obviously to injuries, physical wear and tear with age and the mental and physical fatigue of being on the field day in and day out for an hour plus.  I believe that those are real factors relative to performance and the fact that DH's do not even break a sweat and can look at film between innings is a huge advantage especially during the so-called dog days of August.  Add to that the fact that if for example, they struggle against say left-handed pitchers, they can easily be replaced in the lineup with a player who has better numbers.  In recent years (not this year) how often did we see a guy like David Ortiz "rested" against left-handers because he had more often than not struggled against them?   

    I took a moment to look at numbers of the position player whose career "statistically" (similarity score) most closely matched that of Edgar Martinez.  His name is Will "The Thrill" Clark and and he received 1.5% of the HOF vote during his initial year of eligibility.  Those who developed the game got it right when they determined that there should be 9 innings, 3 outs per inning and 3 strikes for a strikeout.  They assumed that baseball players had to have certain skills to play the game including running, catching and throwing a baseball, but recognized that they needed to make a provision for allowing substitutions.  It's called a pinch hitter and it remains an important part of the strategy of the game in the senior circuit.  A DH in the AL is simply a recurring pinch hitter who hits for whomever the pitcher is that day and has the huge advantage of multiple pinch hit at bats in the same game.      
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    That worthless, non-fielder Ortiz hit another homer today. Yeah, no way do  you put a guy like that in the Hall. Right. Forget about his torrid career of homers, RBI, GW hits, clutch hits, hits to start rallies, extend rallies, help his team win games. No, you don't want one of the greatest Sox ever to make the Hall. I mean you have to penalize him. Jesus H. Jiminy, I'm so sick of this assumption that DHs don't have a place in the game.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    Ortiz finished in the top 5 in MVP voting 5 straight years.  One of those was a second place finish.  So obviously the baseball writers recognize the value of a DH who puts up the numbers Papi has. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: Should Designated Hitters Be Hall Of Famers?

    Should hack beat reporters and lame announcers be Hall of Famers?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share