View Poll Results: How many HoFers?

Voters
16. You may not vote on this poll
  • Under 150

    1 6.25%
  • 150-200

    3 18.75%
  • 201-250

    6 37.50%
  • 251-300

    2 12.50%
  • 301-350

    0 0%
  • 351-400

    1 6.25%
  • 400+

    3 18.75%
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: How Many Are In Your Ideal HoF?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    The Moon
    Posts
    4,952

    How Many Are In Your Ideal HoF?

    If you were given the power to completely restructure the Hall using only available players, about how many players would you want? 150? 250? 350?
    "Allen Sutton Sothoron pitched his initials off today."--1920s article

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Florissant, Mo.
    Posts
    17,419
    Including the ineligible players who are deserving, I'd say about 220. Just based on guys who are eligible, I'd say about 200.
    1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

    1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

    1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012


    The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
    The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Williamsport PA
    Posts
    2,861
    If you count the executives and managers, Negro League players, and they guy who wrote Take Me Out to the Ball Game, adding to those fifty or so I can come up with an additional 25 player per decade. That puts me in neighborhood of 350.

    But I am a Big Hall kind of guy.
    Last edited by Second Base Coach; 05-03-2012 at 05:21 PM.
    Your Second Base Coach
    That number "WAR" does NOT measure wins above replacement. I am not sure what it measures, but it sure isn't the value between a player and his back-up. The final number certainly does not measure what the name suggests.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hCIvMule0

  4. #4
    When I go to a museum, I like to spend the whole day there, so 400+

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Anderson, SC
    Posts
    9,382
    Well, there are 234 players right now. I don't want to have a situation where players will have to be "kicked out" because of an artificial limit. So I say more than 400 players; essentially, no change.

  6. #6
    I like the size of the HOF. Obviously there are some mistakes, and considerable disagreement about how many. I think there are about 10 REALLY obvious mistakes, plus another 10 or so grey zone guys, but I would never advocate their removal. What I would like to do is add perhaps 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 guys who I think merit inclusion. This would make the current HOF around 240 player members.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Balmer, Merlin
    Posts
    7,577
    In an alternate universe, I would retroactively select 2 major league players per season starting in 1901, bringing me to a total of 224 major leaguers, about the size of Cooperstown. Then I would induct players from other leagues (Negro, AA, NA, Nippon) based on the value of of the major leaguers. So the grand total would be around 260 players.

    In our timeline, I would increase the size to 301-350 to largely fill in the holes left by inducting gray-zone candidates, but not the by inducting the worst mistakes. I would not kick anyone out.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    The Moon
    Posts
    4,952
    As a small Hall guy, I gotta go with 200-250 (as of now). I disagree with anything above 300
    "Allen Sutton Sothoron pitched his initials off today."--1920s article

  9. #9
    Right now I have about 100 LOCK hitters and 50 LOCK pitchers. There are maybe 120 more on the border given all consideration for things like historical importance. I'd probably put just under half in so I said 150-200 but really its right at the 200 mark as of today. I may be mis-estimating how many negro league players are rightly in. I just know that by the time I get to down close to 100 position players and 50 pitchers MLB I start to really wonder about some of them.

  10. #10
    150 players, MAX. Look at who got in and who had to wait from the 30's to 60's, and you'll see the intention of the Hall of Fame was NOT to have about half of the guys now elected, elected!!!!

    If you got rid of all the "very good for a long time" or "great for a few years and overhyped" or "got in because of their Veterans' Committee cronies", you'd be left with the true Hall of Famers.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by brett View Post
    Right now I have about 100 LOCK hitters and 50 LOCK pitchers. There are maybe 120 more on the border given all consideration for things like historical importance. I'd probably put just under half in so I said 150-200 but really its right at the 200 mark as of today. I may be mis-estimating how many negro league players are rightly in. I just know that by the time I get to down close to 100 position players and 50 pitchers MLB I start to really wonder about some of them.
    Curious who makes that cut of yours? Would you mind sharing it?

  12. #12
    I think the current number of 236 (after this year's inductions) is just about right, but I would certainly change the composition.

    I also wouldn't have a problem with a bigger Hall. The game has been played professionally for over 140 years, the Hall of Fame serves as something of a chronicle of this long history. A more inclusive Hall of Fame may help to better preserve the game's history and of players of (increasingly) long ago.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by thefeckcampaign View Post
    Curious who makes that cut of yours? Would you mind sharing it?


    I'll try to get to it. I reserve spots for a few guys like Dizzy Dean and Willie Keeler and some borderline value guys who had the talent which was valued in their time like Sisler. Not sure about Terry, Medwick, Traynor who were certainly a big part of history.

    So I'd say I have really only about 80 and 40 position and pitcher spots based on value and only from the pool of eligible 20th century MLB players. I can try to fill in that list.

    Then there may be a good 30 negro leaguers, 30 19th century guys, and maybe up to 20 spots saved for guys like Dizzy Dean.
    This would be basically the top 8 position players and 4 pitchers per decade. I'd say that if a player was one of the top 8 position players in MLB for any 10 year period they should get strongly considered, so maybe it goes up a little.

    And I am not saying that Dean does not deserve to be in on equal ground with those guys, just that he definitely should be in, and he might not qualify on a 10 year standard. Was he a top 4 pitcher for a 10 year period?
    Last edited by brett; 05-07-2012 at 07:27 AM.

  14. #14
    Here are the eligible pitchers who played significantly in the 1900s. First is the list I would put in, and second are the borderline guys:

    Young
    Johnson
    Alexander
    Nichols
    Grove
    Seaver
    Niekro
    Blyleven
    Perry
    Mathewson
    Spahn
    Carlton
    Gibson
    Ryan
    Plank
    Jenkins
    Roberts
    Hubbell
    Feller
    Palmer
    Waddell
    Ed Walsh
    Koufax
    Marichal
    Drysdale
    Newhouser
    Mordecai Brown
    Whitey Ford
    Dizzy Dean


    Eckersley
    Kevin Brown
    Vic Willis
    Tiant
    Vance
    Faber
    Coveleski
    Cone
    Lyons
    Joss
    Sutton
    Saberhagen
    Stieb
    Gossage
    Wilhelm

    Among active or not yet eligible guys, if they never played again:
    Maddux
    Randy Johnson
    Rivera
    Glavine
    Mussina
    Halladay
    Pedro

    probable:
    Schilling
    Smoltz

    not sure for various reasons:
    Clemens
    Santana
    Hoffmann
    Last edited by brett; 05-07-2012 at 07:57 AM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    270 miles East of the Arch
    Posts
    5,655
    Slightly smaller than it is now. Certainly no bigger. Veterans committee selections under the highest scrutiny, at least that's where I'd start
    "Herman Franks to Sal Yvars to Bobby Thomson. Ralph Branca to Bobby Thomson to Helen Rita... cue Russ Hodges."

  16. #16
    I am a big small Hall guy. I think only the top ten or so players per decade should make it, so I would have less than 150 players total enshrined right now. I think the Hall of Fame should be for great players, not good players.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Williamsport PA
    Posts
    2,861
    I would think an era-by-era hall would be a good idea, as we have seen great players come along every so often.
    Your Second Base Coach
    That number "WAR" does NOT measure wins above replacement. I am not sure what it measures, but it sure isn't the value between a player and his back-up. The final number certainly does not measure what the name suggests.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hCIvMule0

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
  •