|
|
Yep. Because if I'm building a team, I'll choose SCOTT ROLEN over DON MATTINGLY. Hell, how is Rolen better than Andruw Jones?
|
|
|
How are Fred McGriff, Harold Baines and Jim Rice better than Mattingly or A Jones?
How is Bert Blyleven better than Guidry?
John 3:16 * Ephesians 2:8-9 * Romans 10:9-10 * John 14:3-6 * Romans 5:8
|
|
|
Yep. Because if I'm building a team, I'll choose SCOTT ROLEN over DON MATTINGLY.
Hell, how is Rolen better than Andruw Jones?
Just my opinion, they are all very good players, and deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. But Beltran is better than both Jones and Rolen.
Mattingly belongs in the Hall of Fame, so does Keith Hernandez, and Munson. Also...How is Herzog better than Martin?
|
|
|
How are Fred McGriff, Harold Baines and Jim Rice better than Mattingly or A Jones? How is Bert Blyleven better than Guidry?
Again just my opinion, but Guidry belongs in the Hall of Fame, so does Tommy John.
|
|
|
It has become the "Hall of Very Good." I don't even pay attention to it anymore
|
|
|
i'm w new on the "very good" thing. feel like the hall is getting watered down. loved guys like mattingly, munson and guidry. you can add pettitte and bernie to the list. but not sure any of them are HOF. think they all needed another 2 great years to put them over the top. maybe it was the era i grew up in when we had mickey, whitey, yogi and also guys like mays, aaron, gibson. those guys were the best in the game for 10-15 years. not just for 5 or 6 yrs. as good as donnie etc were, they just never achieved that level. unfortunately the steroid thing messes the whole thing up. by their numbers, guys like bonds, arod, manny, clemens are definite hof'ers. if they got in (and i don't think they should), then maybe some of the recent "on the cusp" players don't.
|
|
|
Donnie Baseball: 42.4 WAR, 2152 hits, .307 BA, .830 OPS, League MVP, 9 golden gloves, 1 Batting title, 3 Silver Slugger Awards, 6 All Star teams, 1 x ML POY award. Seems more than pretty good to me.
|
|
|
The Baseball Writers Association of America controls the voting for the annual MVP award, the Cy Young as well as Manager of the Year. They have for a very long time. Why isn't entry into the Hall of Fame based on the number of votes a player receives during his career for one of the major awards rather than a second round of voting taken years after the player is retired ? Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to use the collective judegment of observers as recorded in real time instead of the recollection of survivors sometimes as much as 20 years later ? I did not do the math but I am sure the nerds who follow baseball can devise a clear scoring system to tabulate the voting each year and come up with a clear path to the Hall of Fame. It is very hard for me to understand how guys who do not fare well in regular season or postseason awards become so much more appreciated by writers a decade after their careers end.
|
|
|
i'm w new on the "very good" thing. feel like the hall is getting watered down.
loved guys like mattingly, munson and guidry. you can add pettitte and bernie to the list. but not sure any of them are HOF. think they all needed another 2 great years to put them over the top.
maybe it was the era i grew up in when we had mickey, whitey, yogi and also guys like mays, aaron, gibson. those guys were the best in the game for 10-15 years. not just for 5 or 6 yrs. as good as donnie etc were, they just never achieved that level.
unfortunately the steroid thing messes the whole thing up. by their numbers, guys like bonds, arod, manny, clemens are definite hof'ers. if they got in (and i don't think they should), then maybe some of the recent "on the cusp" players don't.
My argument isn't that Mattingly was as good for his career as Mantle, Aaron or Mays were. My argument is tat for 6 years he was arguably the best plater in baseball, and better than Baines, McGriff, Rice and many others who are in.
That being said, if the Hall included only the absolute greatest, then Mattingly would be a few years short.
John 3:16 * Ephesians 2:8-9 * Romans 10:9-10 * John 14:3-6 * Romans 5:8
|
|
|
i'm w new on the "very good" thing. feel like the hall is getting watered down. loved guys like mattingly, munson and guidry. you can add pettitte and bernie to the list. but not sure any of them are HOF. think they all needed another 2 great years to put them over the top. maybe it was the era i grew up in when we had mickey, whitey, yogi and also guys like mays, aaron, gibson. those guys were the best in the game for 10-15 years. not just for 5 or 6 yrs. as good as donnie etc were, they just never achieved that level. unfortunately the steroid thing messes the whole thing up. by their numbers, guys like bonds, arod, manny, clemens are definite hof'ers. if they got in (and i don't think they should), then maybe some of the recent "on the cusp" players don't.
My argument isn't that Mattingly was as good for his career as Mantle, Aaron or Mays were. My argument is tat for 6 years he was arguably the best plater in baseball, and better than Baines, McGriff, Rice and many others who are in.
That being said, if the Hall included only the absolute greatest, then Mattingly would be a few years short.
we can play the 'if he's in, then he should be in' game. think mcgriff should in. baines at his best was never as good as mattingly. he was more of a compiler. so yeah if baines is in, then donnie should be in. sometimes it's just a matter of timing. donnie had 5 really great years. just wish he would have had maybe 2 more. about the only player in the hall w/o a lot of years is koufax, but those 5 years were probably the greatest that any pitcher ever had. i would never complain if mattingly got in, just think the hall's got diluted from what it was when i was a kid.
|
