Sunday, 11. January 2009
As I try to catch up with everything there will be some rambling and I’ll start with this, the Hall of Fame vote is stupid. Not just baseball, which brought this on, but any Hall of Fame vote. I think this because the voters, aside from most of them being guys who never played the game professionally, only look at the entire body of work instead of putting the work into the era they played in. While not showing his picks, Marc Topkin brought this on with his post regarding his ballot (why the hell are there “Rays” on the ballot anyway?. I have a ton of respect for Marc as a sports writer, but I have problems with his ballot as much as anyone else. Here’s what I took from it.
I know that Topkin has more knowledge of the game than I do and knowing he is building this story toward the big reveal, I have a hard time understanding who his picks are and why. The why is my problem. As he discusses Harold Baines’ hit count, Mar McGuire’s steroid use and Andre Dawson “playing the game right”, I get confused. How can you compare Dawson’s play to Baines’ hits? It doesn’t make any sense to me. Either go by stats or go by era and gameplay, don’t try to combine the two. This is all nuts to me.
With these votes a lot of things must be considered and I’m not arguing that, but I have a huge problem with comparing stats from the 80’s or 90’s to the 40’s and what not. You can’t compare those because the game was different in so many ways that you can’t even discuss it. In my opinion, you have to compare stats within the game as it was at the time. To say that McGuire’s HR’s don’t count as much as Mickey Mantle’s is stupid because of the evolution of sports.
Mantle played in bigger parks, against higher mounds and a bigger strike zone. That would lead most to believe that his HR’s, hits and other offensive stats were harder to come by than players today, but were they really? He didn’t face specialized pitching, multi-cultural players or roided up pitchers, so was it really harder? Babe Ruth is praised as a the greatest player ever because hit he hit so much and was a pitcher first, but what were the athletes like then? I can guarantee you he couldn’t do today what he did then, but I can’t say he couldn’t do either, you follow? If McGuire or Sammy Sosa hit so many HR’s and people discount it because of steroid allegations, they are narrow minded idiots. If you think they were the only ones doing it you’re dumb, if you think pitchers weren’t doing it against them you’re even more stupid.
If you want to argue with that already, that’s the point. You have to judge a guy based on what he does within the era that he’s in against the stats from other guys in the era that he’s in. You can’t compare A-Rod to Hank Aaron, you have to compare him to Barry Bonds and Manny Ramirez. Steroids or not, anyone will agree that Bonds and Ramirez were the greatest hitters of their generation, the problem with these guys is that you compare them to the past guys and things get distorted then. People think less of Ty Cobb now than they did in his day because we know he was a racist, but that has no effect on how he played the game. Cobb was one of the greatest hitters of his time, and in MLB history for that fact, and his personal opinions should have no effect on that.
It’s the greatest and worst argument of all time. Let me tell you a story. My father was a gambler and used to make a living at the dog track in St. Pete (doing fairly well by the way) and there’s a story and opinion that always stuck with me. As he gambled at the dog track he met guys like Pete Rose and Don Zimmer. He hates Pete Rose because he was such a rude guy that he cussed and spoke ill in front of his less than 10 year old son (me) and ended up having to deck Rose because of his behavior. With this personal agenda and acknowledging Rose as a piece of crap person, he still states that he belongs in the Hall of Fame due to his hitting ability alone. This taught me a lot. You can hate someone and still acknowledge their accomplishments.
I’m not trying to start the argument that Rose belongs in the Hall, which I feel he does, I’m just using it as an example of a person throwing personal interests aside for the sake of the accomplishment. Rose bet on games, that’s a fact now, but whether he bet or not doesn’t effect how many hits he got while playing. These are facts and that’s that. The bottom line in all this is this, to include your personal opinions into the argument is ridiculous.
There will always be an argument as to who belongs in the Hall, but it should never include personal opinions on the person. Athletes, Actors and any of us at WORK should only be judged on the performance at work relative to the job now. Don’t judge someone on what someone did 20 years ago, it was a different time, and don’t judge work performance on who the person is outside of the job. It only matters on the performance at work.
The Hall of Fame vote is similar to the MVP vote in this aspect. Example here, why the hell was Tim Tebow voted the MVP of the National Championship game over Percy Harvin? I’ve gotta believe that anyone who watched that game thought Harvin was more valuable than Tebow on that day, maybe not the whole year, but that game. Nothing will ever change in all of this, but I felt the need to put my opinion out here anyway. I’ll get to the rest of the Tampa Bay goings on later.
Technorati Tags: Alex Rodriguez, Andre Dawson, Babe Ruth, Barry Bonds, Don Zimmer, Florida Gators, Hall of Fame, Hank Aaron, Harold Baines, Manny Ramirez, Mark McGuire, Mickey Mantle, National Championship, New York Yankees, Percy Harvin, Pete Rose, Sammy Sosa, Tampa Bay Rays, Tim Tebow, Ty Cobb