Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Griffey

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

  • Cowtipper
    replied
    No, I think they got it, hence their less than serious responses.

    And relievers are terribly underrated and underappreciated in my opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by Cowtipper View Post
    Picking up obvious jokes isn't your forte, huh?
    Well, I was a little skeptical since you have more relievers in the HOF than the real HOF has 3B, but you never know - we have heard some doozies over the years.

    Apparently, several others did not pick up on the joke either, so maybe the issue was the delivery?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cowtipper
    replied
    Picking up obvious jokes isn't your forte, huh?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by Cowtipper View Post
    So, he retired. I don't think he's a Hall of Famer, his numbers come up a little lacking.
    Could you please explain why the following baseball players deserve election (based on your "Single Ballot in the thread next door) but not Griffey:

    Babe Adams
    Albert Belle
    Chief Bender*
    Wally Berger
    Vida Blue
    George J. Burns
    Norm Cash
    Jack Chesbro*
    Rocky Colavito
    Wilbur Cooper
    Paul Derringer
    Dom DiMaggio
    Rick Ferrell*
    Steve Garvey
    George Gore
    Chick Hafey*
    Jesse Haines*
    Babe Herman
    John Hiller
    Gil Hodges
    Elston Howard
    Frank Howard
    Catfish Hunter
    George Kell*
    Harvey Kuenn
    Tommy Leach
    Heinie Manush*
    Firpo Marberry
    Bobby Mathews
    Bill Mazeroski*
    Tommy McCarthy*
    Tony Oliva
    Al Oliver
    Dave Parker
    Herb Pennock*
    Ron Perranoski
    Lip Pike
    Vada Pinson
    Dan Quisenberry
    Ed Reulbach
    Allie Reynolds
    Jim Rice*
    Phil Rizzuto*
    Red Schoendienst*
    Lee Smith
    Rusty Staub
    Vern Stephens
    Bruce Sutter*
    Kent Tekulve
    Hal Trosky
    Bobby Veach
    Mickey Vernon*
    Bucky Walters
    Mickey Welch*
    Maury Wills
    Hack Wilson*
    Smoky Joe Wood
    Ross Youngs*

    I just picked the most controversial. There are another 30ish players on your list who are probably not considered HOFers by most and better than Griffey by none.

    Leave a comment:


  • dominik
    replied
    Originally posted by Cowtipper View Post
    So, he retired. I don't think he's a Hall of Famer, his numbers come up a little lacking.
    which numbers lack? the 630 HRs?

    Leave a comment:


  • Iowanic
    replied
    Where did you get that airplane glue you've been sniffing?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cowtipper
    replied
    So, he retired. I don't think he's a Hall of Famer, his numbers come up a little lacking.

    Leave a comment:


  • White Knight
    replied
    Of course he's a HOFer. He's also the active hits leader, at least until May or June.

    Leave a comment:


  • Seattle1
    replied
    Originally posted by Zito75 View Post
    Back to the thread: He's a first ballot HOF'er, no question about it.
    Here he is just after raising the 12th Man Flag prior to Sunday's Seahawks season finale at Qwest Field.





    :gt

    Leave a comment:


  • Zito75
    replied
    Originally posted by Seattle1 View Post
    I do too. I really like Jose Canseco. He is out there telling the bare-bones truth about everything. If he had some dirt to dish on Griffey you know he wouldn't hold back. I consider his word on this subject to be very, very reliable at this point. All of his claims keep getting proven to be true.
    I've met a lot of people related to the game and I can honestly say I haven't heard anyone bring up Jr.'s name in the same sentence with steroids. We realize he's been injured a few times, but most of those injuries seem "legit" if you ask me... (breaking his hand in 1989, arm in 1996, etc) It would take a hell of a lot of evidence for me to think otherwise.

    Back to the thread: He's a first ballot HOF'er, no question about it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by Brad Harris View Post
    How is Canseco jealous of himself? Did you mean "Bonds and Clemens"?
    Obviously!

    Leave a comment:


  • Chadwick
    replied
    Originally posted by STLCards2 View Post
    I never said "truth coming out is a bad thing." All I said is: just because Canseco did something that may be beneficial to sosciety does not make him a hero or a good guy considering, 1. he did it for the wrong reasons, and 2. he has a laundry list of moral depravity so long that Bonds and Canseco may be jealous. You can't loathe Bonds and Clemens for being amoral and claim that you "like" Canseco. When did I say that his book was did not have some positive repercussions?
    How is Canseco jealous of himself? Did you mean "Bonds and Clemens"?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by dominik View Post
    Hypocrisy or not- without canseco the whole steroid issue would have never come out. There would be still no drug tests, no caught players and maybe even steroids not be banned by law.

    Canseco is for sure a huge ******* who wanted to make money out of it as well as sinking other players with him.

    But like him or not his book did help the whole anti doping policy tremendously.

    For example that hypocrisy of trying to find a black sheep to blame on(you need a black sheep to justify actions-for example osama bin laden...). Bonds and other guys where demonized and picked apart while other guys where the poor victims.

    It was the same like with calr lewis in 88. Ben johnson was the baddest man on planet and lewis the betrayed hero. Years later we found out that lewis was juiced too(and the american sports federation knew it).

    I think truth can be hurting but it's always a good thing when truth comes out. Baseball can no longer blame some black sheeps like our society likes to do as a very convenient way, but it has to face that it's a very commom problem and has to decide how to deal with it.

    A very important person in this is barry bonds. He is by far the best of the roiders. So his induction or not in the HOF will be very important for the future treatment of cheaters.

    I don't care how baseball decides. But they have to treat cheters equally. Baseball has to ackknowledge that roids are very common and not only a matter of a few black sheeps. And then it has to make decisisions...
    I never said "truth coming out is a bad thing." All I said is: just because Canseco did something that may be beneficial to sosciety does not make him a hero or a good guy considering, 1. he did it for the wrong reasons, and 2. he has a laundry list of moral depravity so long that Bonds and Canseco may be jealous. You can't loathe Bonds and Clemens for being amoral and claim that you "like" Canseco. When did I say that his book was did not have some positive repercussions?

    Leave a comment:


  • dominik
    replied
    Originally posted by STLCards2 View Post
    So you don't care about intentions or motive - only results?

    I have no problems with authorized people who call out others for certain things or hold people accountable - but they sure as heck had better be living a clean life themselves and be doing it for the right reasons. Canseco is no hero for whistle-blowing if he is doing it for himself/selfish reasons. That is very different than saying that I feel sorry for the people he has ratted out. Hypocrisy, slander (in case he is wrong about any of the people he accused) and greed are just as morally wrong as cheating and lying (which Canseco has been proven to do as well).

    Would you advocate somebody stealing from thieves or killing murderers? There are legal and ethical ways of dealing with people who break "laws" - ratting them out in books to make money and damage their reputations is not one of them. I cant believe that your hatred for Bonds, Clemens, etc. is so strong that you will support anybody who opposes them, regardless of how corrupt they are. And don't forget about the illegal drug use and domestic abuse. This is the guy you "like?" I can see agreeing with any specific behavior he does, but when you say "I like him", it indicates that you agree with his value system - much of the same value system you loathe so much in others.
    Hypocrisy or not- without canseco the whole steroid issue would have never come out. There would be still no drug tests, no caught players and maybe even steroids not be banned by law.

    Canseco is for sure a huge ******* who wanted to make money out of it as well as sinking other players with him.

    But like him or not his book did help the whole anti doping policy tremendously.

    For example that hypocrisy of trying to find a black sheep to blame on(you need a black sheep to justify actions-for example osama bin laden...). Bonds and other guys where demonized and picked apart while other guys where the poor victims.

    It was the same like with calr lewis in 88. Ben johnson was the baddest man on planet and lewis the betrayed hero. Years later we found out that lewis was juiced too(and the american sports federation knew it).

    I think truth can be hurting but it's always a good thing when truth comes out. Baseball can no longer blame some black sheeps like our society likes to do as a very convenient way, but it has to face that it's a very commom problem and has to decide how to deal with it.

    A very important person in this is barry bonds. He is by far the best of the roiders. So his induction or not in the HOF will be very important for the future treatment of cheaters.

    I don't care how baseball decides. But they have to treat cheters equally. Baseball has to ackknowledge that roids are very common and not only a matter of a few black sheeps. And then it has to make decisisions...

    Leave a comment:


  • swingman24
    replied
    Originally posted by RuthMayBond View Post

    <But doesn't the fact that someone like Mantle not having as many great players competing against him enhance his dominance all the more?>

    I'd think you'd mean just the opposite

    Well, yes. I didn't do a very good job of articulating what I was intending to say.

    You would be correct about Mantle being not as impressive at dominating offensive categories because the overall talent he competed against "appeared" to be much weaker than that of the 1990's, for example. But that really only works if you have someone that dominated in the same way as Mantle during the 90's and I just don't see that.

    I mean yes, you have Bonds during the early 90's and Thomas at about the same time but none of them lead in so many offensive categories for so many years the way Mantle or Musial and others did. Players like Bonds and Thomas always were in the top 5 or so in most categories for close to a decade or more but not like some of the upper echelon players who have come before like Mantle, Musial, Williams, or Wagner. I just mean to say that it was easier for those players to distinguish themselves and rise above their peers more than Griffey or Bagwell or the other players of the 90's.

    So I see what you are saying and somewhat agree but what I'm also trying to get across is the fact that someone like Griffey (since this thread is about him and he was the example that was originally used) didn't lead the ML or even the AL in a number of different offensive stats during his prime seasons doesn't necessarily make him any less great because he had greater competition during his time.

    Do you agree?

    And again I just want to reiterate that I am in no way saying the Griffey and all players of the 90's are superior to Wagner, Musial, or Mantle.
    Last edited by swingman24; 01-09-2010, 09:40 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X