Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Barry Larkin

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

  • Originally posted by Seattle1 View Post
    Just one of those gut instincts.
    If you're concerned about providing appropriate role models for your kids, then you should focus less on what baseball players choose to do behind closed doors and more on teaching your children that "gut instinct" is not an appropriate basis on which to form opinions about people. Of course, you'd have to learn that yourself, first.
    "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
    "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
    "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
    "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Classic View Post
      If you're concerned about providing appropriate role models for your kids, then you should focus less on what baseball players choose to do behind closed doors and more on teaching your children that "gut instinct" is not an appropriate basis on which to form opinions about people. Of course, you'd have to learn that yourself, first.
      So by your logic if a baseball player chooses to take steroids "behind closed doors," a practice which has always been inherently morally and ethically reprehensible no matter when the rules happened to kick in, that is ok? I'm glad my children aren't being raised by you then because I don't think they should learn your lesson that "it's ok as long as you don't get caught because it's nobody else's business."

      Comment


      • Gentlemen:

        The personal back and forth will stop immediately, or I promise consequences for both of you. It's obvious you don't agree, but there are rules against personal attacks. I will enforce them if there are further outbursts like this. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
        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.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Seattle1 View Post
          So by your logic if a baseball player chooses to take steroids "behind closed doors," a practice which has always been inherently morally and ethically reprehensible no matter when the rules happened to kick in, that is ok? I'm glad my children aren't being raised by you then because I don't think they should learn your lesson that "it's ok as long as you don't get caught because it's nobody else's business."
          I said no such thing. If it makes it simpler, then you can re-read my last post and take the words "behind closed doors" out of it since that's really beside the point: "gut instinct" is an insufficient basis for making critical judgments.
          Last edited by Chadwick; 02-08-2009, 08:58 AM.
          "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
          "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
          "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
          "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

          Comment


          • Originally posted by jalbright View Post
            Gentlemen:

            The personal back and forth will stop immediately, or I promise consequences for both of you. It's obvious you don't agree, but there are rules against personal attacks. I will enforce them if there are further outbursts like this. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
            Ok, sorry about that Jalbright. Sorry for attacking you personally Classic.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Seattle1 View Post
              Ok, sorry about that Jalbright. Sorry for attacking you personally Classic.
              I started it. You have my apologies.
              "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
              "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
              "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
              "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Classic View Post
                I started it. You have my apologies.
                That's no problem. I guess we are seeing this latest A-Rod thing spark some heated debate. (If that's not too much of an understatement.)

                Comment




                • FWIW, I happen to agree with you about Larkin, but on my part it's just speculation. Being a Reds fan, I often wondered about Larkin and Griffey in the 2000-2004 years with respect to potential PED usage and the health issues both players suffered from.
                  "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
                  "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
                  "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
                  "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DoubleX View Post
                    Larkin's chances will definitely be helped by the fact that his competition in the 2010 election will not be that stiff. Roberto Alomar, Edgar Martinez, and Robin Ventura are the other big names for that election, and only Alomar will likely receive significant support (and perhaps election). Plus, the holdovers will not be that significant either. After next year, in which Gwynn and Ripken will surely be elected, and perhaps McGwire too, the only surefire Hall of Famer to enter the ballot after that is Rickey Henderson (assuming no team gives him another chance), and he'll get in on his first try in 2009. Of the holdovers in 2010, I image Tim Raines will probably be receiving strong support (he might even be in by then, but I doubt it), Bert Blyleven and Andre Dawson could still be hanging around as well, and hopefully Alan Trammell would have gained some momentum by then too. Anyway, the point is that the competition when Larkin enters the ballot will not be that stiff, so he could have a chance of first year election.
                    DoubleX
                    this post in 2006 was a great exercise of anticipation. Congrats.
                    You have to suffer a revolution to know what are you talking about.

                    Comment


                    • Should be inducted into the HoF, but probably won't be.

                      Comment


                      • Larkin will get in in front of a lot of the guys mentioned in this post. However, i dont know if he will get in next year. Could be Robbie only.

                        G Man

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by gman5431 View Post
                          Larkin will get in in front of a lot of the guys mentioned in this post. However, i dont know if he will get in next year. Could be Robbie only.

                          G Man
                          Although Alomar should be a first-ballot HOF, it's unclear whether he will get in because of the scandal surrounding his name. Of course, everybody remembers the John Hirschbeck spitting incident, but more recently he's been accused in a court of law for knowingly passing HIV to his Ex live-in. There also was the tumultuous relationship he had with tennis star Mary Pierce, whom she accused Alomar of physical assault.

                          I personally think he should be judged only by his accomplishments of the baseball field, but some voters might look at his unsavory record and abstain from checking his name.

                          For the record also, I do not support Larkin's HOF bid at this time; a very solid borderline candidate. Have already posted the reasons why on this thread. Larkin might benefit greatly from the passage of time and retrospect, but at the very minimum, I don't believe he should be a first ballot selection.
                          Last edited by Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan; 06-18-2009, 09:07 AM.

                          Comment


                          • For the life of me, I will never understand why people do that. Why does it matter what year a player gets into the HOF? Why would you think "he's a good candidate for the HOF, but I want to make him sweat for a decade before I cast a vote in his favor?"

                            Either he's a HOFer or he's not...make up your mind now and vote the same way every darned year.

                            Comment


                            • Yeah, I agree with that. Some guys gather more and more votes as they go thru the process. I guess it is because someone got talked into voting for him this year (and the player did not get that writer's vote last year), it's a new voter or the writer looked closer at the record.

                              That all sounds logical. But I am betting part of this goes to writers who pick, say, three guys every year. And only three (or whatever the number). This could explain why some players' vote totals go up and down over time.
                              Your Second Base Coach
                              Garvey, Lopes, Russell, and Cey started 833 times and the Dodgers went 498-335, for a .598 winning percentage. That’s 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

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by SABR Matt View Post
                                For the life of me, I will never understand why people do that. Why does it matter what year a player gets into the HOF? Why would you think "he's a good candidate for the HOF, but I want to make him sweat for a decade before I cast a vote in his favor?"

                                Either he's a HOFer or he's not...make up your mind now and vote the same way every darned year.
                                Some voters are stubborn, and they think there are different tiers to the Hall of Fame. If a guy gets in on the first ballot, does that mean he's better than Joe DiMaggio because Joltin' Joe didn't get in on the first ballot? If a guy gets 97% of the vote, does that mean he's better than Babe Ruth? There are some voters who believe this, and that's why we'll never see someone get 100% of the vote, even when it's obvious they are a Hall of Famer. I take that back, someone could get 100% of the vote if they dominate all aspects of the game (hitting, fielding, and even pitching every 5th day) for 20 seasons, play every day, submit a blood test to the media every day to prove they're clean, and also spend all of their free time volunteering at childrens hospitals.

                                As for Larkin, I think his first shot will be his best shot. 2010 is a down year for HOF candidates, so a lot of borderline HOFers (a category I'd put Larkin in) have a chance. I predict Larkin, Blyleven, and Dawson all getting in next year, even though I think very few people believe Barry Larkin was a better player than Robbie Alomar. They'll make Alomar wait, not because he was a borderline HOFer but because there are a handful of incidents of bad behavior that the writers would like to punish him for.
                                Last edited by davewashere; 06-18-2009, 11:16 AM. Reason: typo

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X