Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 44

Thread: Minimum of ten years experience

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by StanTheMan View Post
    If the current system could be improved with 100 different eligibility rules, ALL of them an improvement, then Would the HOF not have serious membership issues? Significant and numerous election errors? A long list of players with LESS than 10 years who are clearly HOF worthy but were not eligible, much less elected?
    IMO, none of those three scenarios apply.
    which are those players with less than 10 years that should be in the HOF? even sandy koufax, the prime example of a short career had 12 seasons (not all of them great of course). I cannot think of a player with less than 10 years who should be in.
    I now have my own non commercial blog about training for batspeed and power using my training experience in baseball and track and field.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    southeastern PA
    Posts
    19,606
    Blog Entries
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by jjpm74 View Post
    I definitely agree that IP/PA/G(for relievers) is a better cutoff than 10 years, but IMO there should not be any arbitrary cutoff. Let's say that the NBHOFM sets the cutoff for a hitter at 5000 PA and 10 years from now, a player comes along and in 4800 PA manages to get 61 WAR, but then is forced to retire. Why should that player be kept out of the HOF due to some arbitrary cutoff? While the 10 year thing may seem illogical and silly to most of us, it is a lot easier to waive than a rigid statistical cutoff would be if a Seaver like player were to retire before hitting the minimum.
    The best argument for these arbitrary cutoffs is in the Hall's history--the Frankie Frisch led version of the Veteran's Committee. Can you imagine what that bunch might have done without it? If you have faith no VC nor the writers will do crazy things without such a limit, then I agree with you. The problem is, I have a nagging feeling that such faith would be misplaced.
    Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
    Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
    A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    southeastern PA
    Posts
    19,606
    Blog Entries
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by dominik View Post
    which are those players with less than 10 years that should be in the HOF? even sandy koufax, the prime example of a short career had 12 seasons (not all of them great of course). I cannot think of a player with less than 10 years who should be in.
    One of the rare guys who might have had a HOF worthy career in less than 10 years is Chino Smith. They put in Joss, and he didn't have 10 (I'm a skeptic of that choice). Dean and a few others had some very minimal "seasons" to help them surpass 10.
    Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
    Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
    A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by jalbright View Post
    One of the rare guys who might have had a HOF worthy career in less than 10 years is Chino Smith.
    I am a Cal McVey supporter. He's generally credited with only 9 seasons.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    southeastern PA
    Posts
    19,606
    Blog Entries
    34
    If we got into standards other than 10 years, it wouldn't be hard to deal with the past. Those situations could be considered. The bigger problem is where the game is going and how willing the Hall is to adjust. In 1920, IP would have seemed to be all you'd need to deal with pitchers. Then came star relievers. If the Hall was not so noted for being about as flexible in its thinking as the plaques it honors players with, that wouldn't cause a great problem. But if we project that trait into the future, that issue could certainly rear its ugly head.
    Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
    Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
    A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    270 miles East of the Arch
    Posts
    5,648
    Quote Originally Posted by dominik View Post
    which are those players with less than 10 years that should be in the HOF? even sandy koufax, the prime example of a short career had 12 seasons (not all of them great of course). I cannot think of a player with less than 10 years who should be in.
    Perhaps you need to re-read the post of mine you quoted?

    You're AGREEING with me...
    "Herman Franks to Sal Yvars to Bobby Thomson. Ralph Branca to Bobby Thomson to Helen Rita... cue Russ Hodges."

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Brooklyn View Post
    Dizzy Dean had his ten years. You may not think he warrants induction based on his low career totals (innings pitched, etc), but he meets the criteria

    The only real was Joss, who played 9 years and then died before the 10th season started. Dying in your prime is a good enough reason for me for an excpetion to be made to add him to the list of eligible candidates - it would then be up to the voters to decide if he did enough in his short career to warrant induction - which you may or may not agree with - but I have no problem with him being included as eligible
    You're right, Dean had 12 years.

    Of course, here are his IP totals in some of them:
    1930 - 9
    1941 - 1
    1947 - 4

    Anyone could accumulate numbers like this. Though he may have appeared in 12 seasons, he did not play 12 seasons -- he played 6.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by dominik View Post
    which are those players with less than 10 years that should be in the HOF? even sandy koufax, the prime example of a short career had 12 seasons (not all of them great of course). I cannot think of a player with less than 10 years who should be in.
    This guy was pretty good in 8 seasons:

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl.../orrda01.shtml

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    D-town, MI
    Posts
    6,624
    Blog Entries
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by StanTheMan View Post
    If the current system could be improved with 100 different eligibility rules, ALL of them an improvement, then Would the HOF not have serious membership issues? Significant and numerous election errors?
    Yes and It does. One-quarter of the players in the HOF are mistakes, meaning they are not among the best 236 players they could have elected. About half of these are gross errors, meaning they are no better qualified than a couple hundred overlooked players. We have had a lot of threads over the years here at BBF addressing this topic, and those are the general conclusions.
    Quote Originally Posted by StanTheMan View Post
    A long list of players with LESS than 10 years who are clearly HOF worthy but were not eligible, much less elected?
    Better to say a long list of players who were clearly HOF worthy before they had played in ten years.
    Si quaeris peninsulam amoenam, circumspice.

    Comprehensive Reform for the Veterans Committee -- Fixing the Hall continued.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Williamsport PA
    Posts
    4,670
    I don't think the ten season cut-off has anything to do with plate appearances or innings pitched.

    I think they (insert your own definition of "they" here) wish to see what kind of impact a player had when at least ten different World Championships were up for grabs and the guy played well enough to have SOME impact on those races.

    Maybe I am wrong, but as each season starts a new run for the title I would think a player's total impact on individual seasons is at least as important as how much he played in any one of them.

    "They" must believe there is more historical significance in playing ten years averaging 420 plate appearances compared to seven seasons at 600 plate appearances. That makes no sense to me either, but my opinion does not matter.

    Another thing to consider. Imagine the old guy in the corner saying "If he were any dang good, he would have played AT LEAST ten years!"

    Maybe that guy's voice is louder than you think.
    Your Second Base Coach
    Garvey, Lopes, Russell, and Cey started 833 times and the Dodgers went 498-335, for a .598 winning percentage. Thatís equal to a team going 97-65 over a season. On those occasions when at least one of them missed his start, the Dodgers were 306-267-1, which is a .534 clip. That works out to a team going 87-75. So having all four of them added 10 wins to the Dodgers per year.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hCIvMule0

  11. #31
    According to Addie Joss' wiki bio, the NBHOFM did not waive the 10 year rule for him. They justified his inclusion by pointing out that he started out the spring of a 10th year on a roster and as such qualified under the 10 year rule.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    D-town, MI
    Posts
    6,624
    Blog Entries
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by jjpm74 View Post
    According to Addie Joss' wiki bio, the NBHOFM did not waive the 10 year rule for him. They justified his inclusion by pointing out that he started out the spring of a 10th year on a roster and as such qualified under the 10 year rule.
    That is a creative and unique application of the 10 year rule. IOW they waived the rule for Joss.
    Si quaeris peninsulam amoenam, circumspice.

    Comprehensive Reform for the Veterans Committee -- Fixing the Hall continued.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    270 miles East of the Arch
    Posts
    5,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Freakshow View Post
    One-quarter of the players in the HOF are mistakes....... We have had a lot of threads over the years here at BBF addressing this topic, and those are the general conclusions. Better to say a long list of players who were clearly HOF worthy before they had played in ten years.
    The online posts of .000000000000000001% of baseball fans does not a concensus make.

    If you or anyone truly feel 25% of an institution is in error, then it's easy, simply ignore it. Same with music/art/motion pictures, and all other entertainment.
    "Herman Franks to Sal Yvars to Bobby Thomson. Ralph Branca to Bobby Thomson to Helen Rita... cue Russ Hodges."

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    D-town, MI
    Posts
    6,624
    Blog Entries
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by StanTheMan View Post
    The online posts of .000000000000000001% of baseball fans does not a concensus make.
    True, but we're not talking about a consensus of random fans. We're talking about the scholars here at BBF.

    Quote Originally Posted by StanTheMan View Post
    If you or anyone truly feel 25% of an institution is in error, then it's easy, simply ignore it.
    That's one option, but not at all helpful. You can be happy with the status quo, or you can seek to make the world better.
    Si quaeris peninsulam amoenam, circumspice.

    Comprehensive Reform for the Veterans Committee -- Fixing the Hall continued.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    270 miles East of the Arch
    Posts
    5,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Freakshow View Post
    True, but we're not talking about a consensus of random fans. We're talking about the scholars here at BBF.

    That's one option, but not at all helpful. You can be happy with the status quo, or you can seek to make the world better.
    The scholars are not infallible. Sometimes change for change's sake is actually regression.
    "Herman Franks to Sal Yvars to Bobby Thomson. Ralph Branca to Bobby Thomson to Helen Rita... cue Russ Hodges."

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    D-town, MI
    Posts
    6,624
    Blog Entries
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by StanTheMan View Post
    The scholars are not infallible. Sometimes change for change's sake is actually regression.
    These are your best arguments in defense of the 10-year rule?
    Si quaeris peninsulam amoenam, circumspice.

    Comprehensive Reform for the Veterans Committee -- Fixing the Hall continued.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    270 miles East of the Arch
    Posts
    5,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Freakshow View Post
    These are your best arguments in defense of the 10-year rule?
    Not unless you're cherry picking...

    Perhaps similar to those who shout about player X Y of Z being not worthy of election, oblivious or at the very least incapable of fully understanding the writers mindset at the time.
    "Herman Franks to Sal Yvars to Bobby Thomson. Ralph Branca to Bobby Thomson to Helen Rita... cue Russ Hodges."

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Staten Island, New York
    Posts
    5,896
    If they make exceptions, then there is no 10 year minimum rule.
    Lou Gehrig is the Truest Yankee of them all!

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    270 miles East of the Arch
    Posts
    5,648
    Quote Originally Posted by White Knight View Post
    If they make exceptions, then there is no 10 year minimum rule.
    Unless one is seeking to make the world a better place.
    "Herman Franks to Sal Yvars to Bobby Thomson. Ralph Branca to Bobby Thomson to Helen Rita... cue Russ Hodges."

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Staten Island, New York
    Posts
    5,896
    Quote Originally Posted by StanTheMan View Post
    Unless one is seeking to make the world a better place.
    I can understand maybe if someone great dies in his 9th year, but never should we make exceptions if i guy just feels like retiring.
    Lou Gehrig is the Truest Yankee of them all!

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •