Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Will Clark Got Shafted!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DoubleX
    replied
    Originally posted by Baseball Guru
    The HOF voting is so bogus its not even funny... I think there were 12 ballots returned blank and lets be serious here, Gregg Jefferies, Doug Jones, Walt Weiss, getting ANY votes is a total joke! Those were wasted votes!
    I actually don't mind the blank ballots so much because it shows that at least those writers have consistent principles. Let's face it, if we really got down to it, how many really bonafide Hall of Famers were in this election? Zero. There is not one player that stands out as clearly a Hall of Famer, everyone needs some argument in their favor. So I can't really blame those 12 writers for believing there was not one Hall of Fame worthy player this year.

    It's when the writers start showing inconsistency in their voting. For example, every writer that had Bruce Sutter on their ballot, should have had Goose Gossage on as well, but that wasn't the case. In another example, Ozzie Smith gets in on his first try, while his superior peer Alan Trammell struggles to get above 15%? I don't get!

    Leave a comment:


  • Baseball Guru
    replied
    The HOF voting is so bogus its not even funny... I think there were 12 ballots returned blank and lets be serious here, Gregg Jefferies, Doug Jones, Walt Weiss, getting ANY votes is a total joke! Those were wasted votes!

    Leave a comment:


  • DoubleX
    replied
    I think it's a very valid point that you're either a Hall of Famer or you're not, so if you're clearly not, what difference is it if you're bounced on the first ballot?

    To that I contend that even just sticking on the ballot is a a symbol of status and respect. It's for players that were not quite good enough to make Cooperstown, but deserve some recognition of being almost there. And in that way, Clark deserved more respect, instead of the one and done.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mattingly
    replied
    http://www.baseball-reference.com/c/clarkwi02.shtml
    Code:
     Year Ag Tm  Lg  G   AB    R    H   2B 3B  HR  RBI  SB CS  BB  SO   BA   OBP   SLG   TB   SH  SF IBB HBP GDP 
    +--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+---+---+---+---+---+
     1986 22 SFG NL 111  408   66  117  27  2  11   41   4  7  34  76  .287  .343  .444  181   9   4  10   3   3
     1987 23 SFG NL 150  529   89  163  29  5  35   91   5 17  49  98  .308  .371  .580  307   3   2  11   5   2
     1988 24 SFG NL 162  575  102  162  31  6  29  109   9  1 100 129  .282  .386  .508  292   0  10  27   4   9
     1989 25 SFG NL 159  588  104  196  38  9  23  111   8  3  74 103  .333  .407  .546  321   0   8  14   5   6
     1990 26 SFG NL 154  600   91  177  25  5  19   95   8  2  62  97  .295  .357  .448  269   0  13   9   3   7
     1991 27 SFG NL 148  565   84  170  32  7  29  116   4  2  51  91  .301  .359  .536  303   0   4  12   2   5
     1992 28 SFG NL 144  513   69  154  40  1  16   73  12  7  73  82  .300  .384  .476  244   0  11  23   4   5
     1993 29 SFG NL 132  491   82  139  27  2  14   73   2  2  63  68  .283  .367  .432  212   1   6   6   6  10
     1994 30 TEX AL 110  389   73  128  24  2  13   80   5  1  71  59  .329  .431  .501  195   0   6  11   3   5
     1995 31 TEX AL 123  454   85  137  27  3  16   92   0  1  68  50  .302  .389  .480  218   0  11   6   4   7
     1996 32 TEX AL 117  436   69  124  25  1  13   72   2  1  64  67  .284  .377  .436  190   0   7   5   5  10
     1997 33 TEX AL 110  393   56  128  29  1  12   51   0  0  49  62  .326  .400  .496  195   0   5  11   3   4
     1998 34 TEX AL 149  554   98  169  41  1  23  102   1  0  72  97  .305  .384  .507  281   0   7   5   3  15
     1999 35 BAL AL  77  251   40   76  15  0  10   29   2  2  38  42  .303  .395  .482  121   0   3   2   2   5
     2000 36 TOT    130  427   78  136  30  2  21   70   5  2  69  69  .319  .418  .546  233   0   4   3   7   7
             BAL AL  79  256   49   77  15  1   9   28   4  2  47  45  .301  .413  .473  121   0   3   3   4   4
             STL NL  51  171   29   59  15  1  12   42   1  0  22  24  .345  .426  .655  112   0   1   0   3   3
    +--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+---+---+---+---+---+
     15 Seasons         7173      2176     47     1205     48    1190  .303  .384  .497       13 101 155  59 100
                   1976      1186      440    284       67    937                       3562
    +--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+---+---+---+---+---+
     162 Game Avg        588   97  178  36  4  23   99   5  4  77  98  .303  .384  .497  292   1   8  13   5   8
     Career High    162  600  104  196  41  9  35  116  12 17 100 129  .333  .431  .580  321   9  13  27   7  15
    +--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+---+---+---+---+---+
     Year Ag Tm  Lg  G   AB    R    H   2B 3B  HR  RBI  SB CS  BB  SO   BA   OBP   SLG   TB   SH  SF IBB HBP GDP

    Leave a comment:


  • 538280
    replied
    I think Clark was a borderline HOFer and I may have voted for him if I got the chance. He was certainly the best 1B on the ballot, ahead easily of Mattingly and Garvey. He was probably the best hitter in the game in the late 1980s and was a fabulous fielder from first base. Probably should have won the MVP in 1989 at the expense of his teammate, Kevin Mitchell.

    I do think it is unfair that Clark is now off the ballot and probably will never have another good shot at the Hall. The more I think about it, the more I'm against the 5% rule. It almost encourages writers to vote for players who they don't neccessarily think are quite HOF matierial just because they think they deserve to stay on the ballot. That's not how it should be.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cougar
    replied
    Originally posted by leecemark
    --I'm surprised Clark got bounced on the first ballot. I really expected he would get more support. However, I am far from outraged by the situation. I wouldn't have voted for him, so why should I be angry that 5% of the voters didn't either. Its a yes or no vote. if you are 49% of a Hallof Famer and everybody sees that acurately then you should get zero votes.
    This is a valid point, and I respect this point of view.

    On the other hand, if you believe that Clark was a qualified HOFer and the equal of virtually any position player on the ballot, his peremptory dismissal is quite deflating.

    Originally posted by leecemark
    -- Doesn't happen that way, of course, since everybody evaluates a little difference, but basically either you are or are not a Hall of Famer. If every voter made an honest evalution each time around there would only be first ballot hall of famers and not hall of famers. Nobody has their qualifications change once they are on the ballot.
    Almost true -- the problem is the 10 player limit on the ballot. If you think there are more HOFers on the ballot than 10 (as I do), you're forced to make some rather arbitrary value judgements and/or vote strategically.

    Leave a comment:


  • leecemark
    replied
    --I'm surprised Clark got bounced on the first ballot. I really expected he would get more support. However, I am far from outraged by the situation. I wouldn't have voted for him, so why should I be angry that 5% of the voters didn't either. Its a yes or no vote. if you are 49% of a Hallof Famer and everybody sees that acurately then you should get zero votes.
    -- Doesn't happen that way, of course, since everybody evaluates a little difference, but basically either you are or are not a Hall of Famer. If every voter made an honest evalution each time around there would only be first ballot hall of famers and not hall of famers. Nobody has their qualifications change once they are on the ballot.

    Leave a comment:


  • RBi
    replied
    I can not make up my mind what shocks me more...

    Will Clark not getting the 5% needed to remain on the ballot.

    Or

    Gregg Jefferies received 2 (Two) votes!!!

    WHAT?


    This leads me to believe these writers do not know what they are doing...

    Leave a comment:


  • Ex-Expo fan
    replied
    Originally posted by mac195
    Then why would you expect any of the BBWAA members to vote for him?
    Because they have voted for Alan Trammel, Orel Hershiser, and Dave Concepcion, have voted in Ozzie Smith on his first ballot and have voted in Bruce Sutter before voting in Andre Dawson, Bert Blyleven and Goose Gossage.

    Leave a comment:


  • mac195
    replied
    Originally posted by Ex-Expo fan
    I'm not saying Joe Carter was a Hall of Famer...
    Then why would you expect any of the BBWAA members to vote for him?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cougar
    replied
    Actually, yes I would.

    Leave a comment:


  • mac195
    replied
    Originally posted by Cougar
    Ted Simmons, Dewey Evans, Lou Whitaker, and about a half dozen third baseman are welcoming Will the Thrill to the "If we can't get 5% then something's very, very wrong with the system" club.
    Would you vote "yes" for all of those players?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cougar
    replied
    Bingo!

    There are way too many mistakes that get made, of which Clark is only the latest casualty.

    The rules may only be the second biggest problem, though. The voter pool is a bigger one.

    Originally posted by abacab
    Someone really needs to do something about the 5% rule. It serves no purpose at all, and it takes players completely out of consideration for as much as 15 years! Apparently the whole point is to keep the ballot "uncluttered" with unworthy names. Well, it's one thing to not list the names of players who don't get 5% - that's fair. But why should they be rendered completely ineligible for BBWAA consideration? It doesn't make any sense.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cougar
    replied
    Originally posted by Ex-Expo fan
    The same thing happened to Joe Carter 2 or 3 years ago. That stuff really makes me wonder if some of the baseball writer are really apt to share their vote for the Hall of Fame, or if they are just extremely biased. I'm not saying Joe Carter was a Hall of Famer, but that he shouldn't have been scraped from the list in his first year of eligibility. Some players hang on to it by reputation alone.
    Yeah, Joe Carter's there too. Unfortunately it's all too crowded.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cougar
    replied
    Ted Simmons, Dewey Evans, Lou Whitaker, and about a half dozen third baseman are welcoming Will the Thrill to the "If we can't get 5% then something's very, very wrong with the system" club.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X