Kolek planning to go pro
I was surprised to hear that Verlander had only pitched on 3 days rest one time in his career before today. And once I heard that, I was surprised the Astros trotted him out there.Let him get his normal rest and use the future Hall of Famer in Game 5 if necessary. As a bonus, if you win Game 4 without him, you can start him in Game 1 of the ALCS. I guess it was easier to do with Garret Cole rested and ready for Game 5, but I still didn't like the decision.
Simmons is top ten all time WAR for catchers (all other eligible catchers in top ten are in HOF) He is 2nd all time for catchers in hits and RBI’s...etc...He’s a good candidate.With regards to the other things, yes it does matter with regards to media markets and popularity with media. A borderline candidate will have more challenges. A close friend of mine has been a long time MLB and NFL HOF voter. So I have a little bit of an idea of what their experience is with the process and players. Guys like Jim Edmonds, Chris Carpenter, Adam Wainwright etc...are Hall of the very good type players not HOF. Or more simply put they are or will be in the Cardinals team HOF which has a handful of candidates annually. Simmons did suffer from playing at a similar time with a few of the all time catching greats.
Not bragging (because it's really nothing to brag about), just stating fact: I have been a Baseball HOF voter since 1996. Just FYI, the process is considerably different from the way football chooses its HOFers.Hundreds and hundreds of BBWAA members select for baseball. Each is allowed to choose up to 10 per year (can choose anywhere from 0 to 10). Otherwise, as long as they are on the official ballot, there are no rules. In football, a committee chooses the candidates and a small committee then votes and selects each year's HoFers. Lobbying takes place. Football, unlike baseball, wants to elect X number of HoFers every year.Baseball's veterans committee is more like football's regular committee. They elect guys who were passed over for one reason or another. It's always been a little suspect to me. Players who were vetted for years by hundreds of longtime baseball observers, most of whom had little to no ulterior motive, get rejected over and over again ... and then a small panel steps in and puts those players in the Hall. I guess some guys could have fallen through the cracks for one reason or another ... but otherwise that's how you get the likes of Harold Baines in the Hall. So yes, maybe Simmons still has a shot.
Wow, I'm very concerned for Benny. Being able to mimic Myron Medcalf's writing so closely implies an oncoming case of dementia.
Overheard at BBWAA HQ once a year for the past 30 years: "Dammit, will someone please call the bald guy and tell him to stop writing in Eddie Gaedel."
@mu82Yes or no to Rose
First of all, he was not on the ballot. A few voters wrote him in but not many, and I was not one of them.Otherwise ...In the fairly distant past, my position was that he should be in the Hall as a player but should not be allowed anywhere near the game -- not as GM, manager, coach, "ambassador," nothing. The thought process was that he didn't bet on baseball as a player -- so he should be allowed in for his playing exploits -- but he did bet on his own games when he was a manager, so that is a lifetime ban away from the game.However, more recently, credible evidence surfaced that he indeed did bet on his games when he was an active player. For me (and obviously for the Hall), that is absolutely disqualifying.
What about the Juicers?
The cream and the clear weren't on the banned substance list.Traditionalists will still side w/ the No's. The strict constructionalists will side with the Yes's.(Not using those terms in a political way at all. GBA!)
I’d be curious why you say that if the rules were plain as day at what is and isn’t allowed. Doesn’t that feed into the constructionist mindset?
Holy $hit.
Biggest choke job in NL history? Go Natty's.