Which baseball players who are not in the Hall of Fame SHOULD be?

Asked by:

jasonwrites (+)

» Contact me
» Send Gift

» me

Answers Created: 696
Colorado Rockies

Last Answer: vindog (+)

» Contact me
» Send Gift

» me

Answers: 29782
Dallas Cowboys

Who liked it? 30

nortonsfury (+)
New York Yankees

Cardsfan5 (+)
St. Louis Cardinals

jackthornhill14 (+)
Los Angeles Dodgers

machetto (+)
Seattle Mariners

SuperStar123 (+)
Detroit Tigers

USMC_0369_8541 (+)
New York Mets

mrturk (+)
Detroit Tigers

LLUmpJimWard (+)
Boston Red Sox

keithparsons2 (+)
Cincinnati Reds

buckhntr (+)
Boston Red Sox

... and 20 other fans

« MLB Polls | Skip to Next Poll »

30	Which baseball players who are not in the Hall of Fame SHOULD be? Hall of Fame weekend and all the talk about inducting Pete Rose or steroid users had me wondering... FanIQ Pts? No \| MLB, New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox \| Closes 770 days \| Numeric Input Opinion Poll Tagged as: MLB Hall Of Fame

	&nbp;
TOP COMMENT
#1 \| 116 days ago jasonwrites (+)	(Edited by jasonwrites) First thoughts... 1) Bert Byleven. 287 wins, 2-time All-Star. 3.31 career ERA, 3701 K, WHIP>1.2. Played on a lot of noncontenders, but in 3 playoff appearances: 5-1, 2.47, 2 World Series Championships (1979 Pirates, 1987 Twins). Not sure what else you're supposed to do to get in... except the arbitrary 300 wins. 2) Dale Murphy. OK, this is a sentimental vote, because he was my favorite player on my favorite team growing up. From 1980-1987 he was arguably the best player in the National League. 7-time All-Star (6 in a row 1982-7), 2-time NL MVP (1982-3), 5 consecutive Gold Gloves, 4 consecutive Silver Sluggers, Lou Gehrig Award, Roberto Clemente Award. Unfortunately after 1987 his skills went into decline, and his BA declined significantly as he seemed to swing at any down-and-away pitch. Finally his bad knees ended his career at age 37 in 1993, at age 37, as a member of the inaugural Colorado Rockies team. Unfortunately, playing a handful of home games in Denver didn't help him get the last two home runs he needed to reach 400. Enter the poll to see my answer
	9


98 Comments \| Sorted by Most Recent First \| Red = You Disagreed
Vote for your favorite comments. Fans decide the Top Comment (3+ votes) and also hide poor quality comments (4+ votes).
#1 \| 116 days ago jasonwrites (+)	(Edited by jasonwrites) First thoughts... 1) Bert Byleven. 287 wins, 2-time All-Star. 3.31 career ERA, 3701 K, WHIP>1.2. Played on a lot of noncontenders, but in 3 playoff appearances: 5-1, 2.47, 2 World Series Championships (1979 Pirates, 1987 Twins). Not sure what else you're supposed to do to get in... except the arbitrary 300 wins. 2) Dale Murphy. OK, this is a sentimental vote, because he was my favorite player on my favorite team growing up. From 1980-1987 he was arguably the best player in the National League. 7-time All-Star (6 in a row 1982-7), 2-time NL MVP (1982-3), 5 consecutive Gold Gloves, 4 consecutive Silver Sluggers, Lou Gehrig Award, Roberto Clemente Award. Unfortunately after 1987 his skills went into decline, and his BA declined significantly as he seemed to swing at any down-and-away pitch. Finally his bad knees ended his career at age 37 in 1993, at age 37, as a member of the inaugural Colorado Rockies team. Unfortunately, playing a handful of home games in Denver didn't help him get the last two home runs he needed to reach 400. Enter the poll to see my answer
	9
#2 \| 116 days ago sixty8 (+)	Pete Rose and Gil Hodges. Enter the poll to see my answer
	7
#3 \| 115 days ago computer_guy999 (+)	I got to say Andre Dawson and Bert Blyleven - both had great careers, and deserve to be there. Congrats to Rickey Henderson and Jim Rice on their election in to the Hall this year (2009). Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#4 \| 115 days ago computer_guy999 (+)	Andre Dawson and Bert Blyleven, they both had great careers, and deserve to be in the Hall. Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#5 \| 115 days ago sosa (+)	ANDRE DAWSON, AND LEE SMITH, MY GOSH THE MAN WAS THE SAVES LEADER IN THE HISTORY OF THE GAME FOR 10 YEARS, TIL THEY STARTED OUT HANDING OUT SAVES LIKE M&M'S, NOW IT IS SO MUCH EASIER TO GET THEM.
	3
#6 \| 115 days ago Eamon_60 (+)	Shoeless Joe Enter the poll to see my answer
	4
#7 \| 115 days ago Eamon_60 (+)	Shoeless Joe Enter the poll to see my answer
	3
#8 \| 115 days ago mnstar1959 (+)	Bert, Shoeless, Lee, and Pete. Andre, because they let Rice in (I didn't think he had the numbers); Dale was great for a 6 year period needed more longevity for my taste. Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#9 \| 114 days ago sdm (+)	computer_guy999 wrote: Andre Dawson and Bert Blyleven, they both had great careers, and deserve to be in the Hall. I totally agree - if Jim Rice is in the Hall then Dawson should be in also. Compare their stats - Dawson kills Rice. And poor Bert? Imagine if he actually played for a good team? Get these guys in and stop playing your silly political games. Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#10 \| 111 days ago radiowave000 (+)	Dawson. Blyleven, and Rose. Baseball writers are a bunch of political hacks and should not be in charge of the HOF vote. Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#11 \| 111 days ago mikecubbie69 (+)	Ron Santo and Andre Dawson, definitely........ I would also say that Bert Blyleven, Tony Oliva, Gil Hodges and Lee Smith probaly should be in too.
	1
(4) This comment was voted poor quality by FanIQ (Show anyway)
#12 \| 111 days ago mikecubbie69 (+)	(Edited by mikecubbie69) Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson do NOT belong. Anyone who bet on a baseball game does not belong. And to those apologists who point to Jackson stats in the 1919 Series, thats irrelevant, he still took the money and it was blood money indeed. Landis was right to banish him, though questions still remain as to Buck Weavers role, now you could make a case that Weavers name should be cleared. As for that lying sack of sh-- Rose, he not only bet on baseball but lied about and let people who supported him think he was innocent. As for his motives, he only came clean in order to sell a book. In my mind, that makes him just as much a piece of scum as Jose Canseco and you can bet Jose will never get in, so no, the piece of crap Rose should remain banned from the HOF!
	3
#13 \| 111 days ago maroon&gold4eve (+)	Joe Jackson and Pete Rose are a given to me.Outside of those 2,Bert Blyleven,Tommy John,Jim Kaat,and Andre Dawson.Being a lifelong Braves fan,I would love to see Dale Murphy,but thats a longshot at best. Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#14 \| 111 days ago suedon70 (+)	Pete Rose and Bert Blyleven - I too would LOVE to see Dale Murphy get in, we'll see.....

#15 \| 110 days ago joshh212 (+)	(Edited by joshh212) Enter the poll to see my answer

#16 \| 110 days ago joshh212 (+)	santo is a whiny loser who should never be inducted and wont. the only two are shoeless joe and pete rose Enter the poll to see my answer
	3
#17 \| 110 days ago mnstar1959 (+)	mikecubbie69 wrote: Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson do NOT belong. Anyone who bet on a baseball game does not belong. And to those apologists who point to Jackson stats in the 1919 Series, thats irrelevant, he still took the money and it was blood money indeed. Landis was right to banish him, though questions still remain as to Buck Weavers role, now you could make a case that Weavers name should be cleared. As for that lying sack of sh-- Rose, he not only bet on baseball but lied about and let people who supported him think he was innocent. As for his motives, he only came clean in order to sell a book. In my mind, that makes him just as much a piece of scum as Jose Canseco and you can bet Jose will never get in, so no, the piece of crap Rose should remain banned from the HOF! Ok Mr. Mikecubbie..........Using your logic(no liars allowed) Bonds, McGuire, Palmerio(A-Rod, Man-Ram?) have no chance either; but Petite, Giambi do even though they took it, albeit proved only before 2003, because they admitted they took the stuff but still got their nos. Personally. I have no qualms with the PED players getting in, just make it posthumously that way they can't "use" the HOF status as a money making tool. Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#18 \| 110 days ago mnstar1959 (+)	mikecubbie69 wrote: Ron Santo and Andre Dawson, definitely........ I would also say that Bert Blyleven, Tony Oliva, Gil Hodges and Lee Smith probaly should be in too. Olivia didn't have long enough playing time; he was injured half his playing career. Unfortunately for him as hewasa great talent. Why Hodges? The only thing I remeber from him has managing the "Amazing Mets" in '69. Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#19 \| 109 days ago dragonzblade3232 (+)	LOL Put Michael Jordan in there he was a Minor League Baseball play the most famous minor league baseball player ever the highest valued minor league baseball player ever and one of the top three most famous athletes ever lol in the world and one of the top 10 athletes of all time Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#20 \| 107 days ago gobigblue1960 (+)	1347...that's the number...#1, Lou Whittakker...#3, Alan Trammell...and #47, Jack Morris. These Detroit Tiger players were at the top of their positions, fot the decade of the 1980's. Gold Gloves, Rookie of the Year for Whittakker, World Series MVP for Trammell, and 254 wins, including the most in the 80's for Morris, who also won a total of three Series Rings. They are my guys, yes, and "homer" picks...but someone has to be there for them, and this Tiger Fan will carry their banners forever.! Enter the poll to see my answer
	3
#21 \| 104 days ago fred6185 (+)	Blyleven and Rose..... and the CEO of BALCO (co-owner of all-time HR record!!)
	1
#22 \| 92 days ago auntwisa (+)	Hands down Pete Rose. My God, if Michael Vick can play ball again after the atrocities that he inflicted on animals.........Pete Rose should be inducted into the Hall of Fame. Sure he bet on sports, but never when his team was playing. Enter the poll to see my answer
	4
#23 \| 77 days ago duncand_94 (+)	pete rose the hall is supposed to be about how great you were on the ball field. not if you bet on the games or not. he was and still is the best hitter in baseball
	4
#24 \| 64 days ago PoppyMack (+)	Pete Rose should be in the hall of fame because Of what he did as a player
	5
#25 \| 63 days ago jacobmrley (+)	Bert Blyleven, Ron Santo, Andre Dawson, maybe Jim Kaat and Tommy John. Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#26 \| 39 days ago Blues_is_blood (+)	jasonwrites wrote: First thoughts... 1) Bert Byleven. 287 wins, 2-time All-Star. 3.31 career ERA, 3701 K, WHIP>1.2. Played on a lot of noncontenders, but in 3 playoff appearances: 5-1, 2.47, 2 World Series Championships (1979 Pirates, 1987 Twins). Not sure what else you're supposed to do to get in... except the arbitrary 300 wins. 2) Dale Murphy. OK, this is a sentimental vote, because he was my favorite player on my favorite team growing up. From 1980-1987 he was arguably the best player in the National League. 7-time All-Star (6 in a row 1982-7), 2-time NL MVP (1982-3), 5 consecutive Gold Gloves, 4 consecutive Silver Sluggers, Lou Gehrig Award, Roberto Clemente Award. Unfortunately after 1987 his skills went into decline, and his BA declined significantly as he seemed to swing at any down-and-away pitch. Finally his bad knees ended his career at age 37 in 1993, at age 37, as a member of the inaugural Colorado Rockies team. Unfortunately, playing a handful of home games in Denver didn't help him get the last two home runs he needed to reach 400. Here's my 3... 1. Pete Rose. 24 seasons. 17-time all-star. Almost 16,000 plate appearances. Member of baseball's all-century team. No one has more hits, and come on...name one player that has played harder or at more positions than Rose. Apparently though, he wasn't physically able to do any of these things unless he had money riding on it (if you listen to the sportswriters tell it). Cut the crap and put him in the hall where he belongs! 2. Alan Trammell. Only 5 shortstops have won more gold gloves than his 4. Career fielding pct. is .977 (Ozzie Smith's is .978). Career BA is .285. Played in a smaller market so he didn't have the exposure of a Ripken or the flash of Smith, but for 20 seasons he simply got the job done. 3. Jack Morris. No pitcher had more wins in the 80's than Morris. 254 for his career with almost 2500 K's. Three 20 win seasons. Led 4 teams to WS titles. Career numbers are comparable to Drysdale, Gibson, and Feller--all in the hall. What do y'all think?
	3
#27 \| 37 days ago ML31 (+)	(Edited by ML31) Only one name comes to mind. And he is borderline in my opinion... Mark McGwire. I know the average isn't as high as it could be but he played a mean first base at his peak and you just can't argue against the homers. Like it or not, the home run is the sexiest stat in baseball. And he clobbered enough to warrant being at least considered. And easier list would be who is in the Hall who SHOULDN'T be. PS... I'm assuming you are only looking among names who are currently eligible.
	1
#28 \| 37 days ago ML31 (+)	Blues_is_blood wrote: Here's my 3... 1. Pete Rose. 24 seasons. 17-time all-star. Almost 16,000 plate appearances. Member of baseball's all-century team. No one has more hits, and come on...name one player that has played harder or at more positions than Rose. Apparently though, he wasn't physically able to do any of these things unless he had money riding on it (if you listen to the sportswriters tell it). Cut the crap and put him in the hall where he belongs! 2. Alan Trammell. Only 5 shortstops have won more gold gloves than his 4. Career fielding pct. is .977 (Ozzie Smith's is .978). Career BA is .285. Played in a smaller market so he didn't have the exposure of a Ripken or the flash of Smith, but for 20 seasons he simply got the job done. 3. Jack Morris. No pitcher had more wins in the 80's than Morris. 254 for his career with almost 2500 K's. Three 20 win seasons. Led 4 teams to WS titles. Career numbers are comparable to Drysdale, Gibson, and Feller--all in the hall. What do y'all think? What do I think? Rose... On the banned list. So no. Trammell.... Good solid player. But not Hall of Fame good. Morris... Not good enough. Was a very good pitcher a couple of years of his carreer. But never dominated. So no.
	1
#29 \| 37 days ago hclcdestin (+)	jasonwrites wrote: First thoughts... 1) Bert Byleven. 287 wins, 2-time All-Star. 3.31 career ERA, 3701 K, WHIP>1.2. Played on a lot of noncontenders, but in 3 playoff appearances: 5-1, 2.47, 2 World Series Championships (1979 Pirates, 1987 Twins). Not sure what else you're supposed to do to get in... except the arbitrary 300 wins. 2) Dale Murphy. OK, this is a sentimental vote, because he was my favorite player on my favorite team growing up. From 1980-1987 he was arguably the best player in the National League. 7-time All-Star (6 in a row 1982-7), 2-time NL MVP (1982-3), 5 consecutive Gold Gloves, 4 consecutive Silver Sluggers, Lou Gehrig Award, Roberto Clemente Award. Unfortunately after 1987 his skills went into decline, and his BA declined significantly as he seemed to swing at any down-and-away pitch. Finally his bad knees ended his career at age 37 in 1993, at age 37, as a member of the inaugural Colorado Rockies team. Unfortunately, playing a handful of home games in Denver didn't help him get the last two home runs he needed to reach 400. Also Steve Garvey should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame. career .300 hitter/1974 NLMVP,2 X ALL-STAR Game MVP(first player to win twice),played in 5 World Series,1207 consec. games(NL Record)1984 NLCSMVP. 6 X 200 hits a sesson,'77 hit career highs 33HR 115RBI. His career should've been a few years more. If Gary Carter and Rich Gossage are in,why not Steve Garvey? Jack Morris also belongs 1991WSMVP/ played on 4 World Champion teams. Never could understand why he's never up on votes. Tim Raines maybe someday 800+steals,played on NYY'96 WS team. Several others deserve consideration. Dave Parker,Kent Tekulve '79 Pirates.
	1
#30 \| 37 days ago mnstar1959 (+)	ML31 wrote: Only one name comes to mind. And he is borderline in my opinion... Mark McGwire. I know the average isn't as high as it could be but he played a mean first base at his peak and you just can't argue against the homers. Like it or not, the home run is the sexiest stat in baseball. And he clobbered enough to warrant being at least considered. And easier list would be who is in the Hall who SHOULDN'T be. PS... I'm assuming you are only looking among names who are currently eligible. Totally disagree......yes he has a nice HR total but he doesn't look good testifing to Congress....oh thats right leave the past in the past....McGwire = Bonds = Palmerio = Thome = Thomas = Rameriz = AROD and its a shame! Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#31 \| 37 days ago rags684 (+)	1."shoeless" joe jackson 2.pete rose -anyone who thinks for one moment he would throw a game one way or the other never seen the man play baseball 3.gil hodges-because he did mange the mircle mets 4.dale murphy-just went out everyday done his thing and never was trouble 5.andre dawson-probably more for the reason he suffered through on all those bad expo and cub's team's 6.stevev garvey-was never a big fan but could produce runs be it with power or just good base hitting skills Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#32 \| 37 days ago ML31 (+)	mnstar1959 wrote: Totally disagree......yes he has a nice HR total but he doesn't look good testifing to Congress....oh thats right leave the past in the past....McGwire = Bonds = Palmerio = Thome = Thomas = Rameriz = AROD and its a shame! Who gives a crap what he did in Congress? That whole thing was a worthless circus. Not sure why you are swayed by that. Looking at the names you wrote, I 'd have to say McGwire: In. Bonds: In. Palmeiro: Out. Thome: Out. Thomas: Out. Rameriz.... Who? Arod: In. None of them shamed the game more than any owner has. And none is even close to ruining the game like Bud Selig.
	1
#33 \| 37 days ago ML31 (+)	rags684 wrote: 1."shoeless" joe jackson 2.pete rose -anyone who thinks for one moment he would throw a game one way or the other never seen the man play baseball 3.gil hodges-because he did mange the mircle mets 4.dale murphy-just went out everyday done his thing and never was trouble 5.andre dawson-probably more for the reason he suffered through on all those bad expo and cub's team's 6.stevev garvey-was never a big fan but could produce runs be it with power or just good base hitting skills Jackson: Banned list. Rose. I saw him play. Lots. And I 100% believe he manipulated his team based on what games he was wagering on and not what the game situation dictated. Hodges: One season does not a Hall of Famer make. Just ask Roger Maris. Murphy: Good. But not Hall of Fame good. Dawson: Good. Not Hall of Fame Good. Garvey: You have got to be effing kidding.
	3
#34 \| 37 days ago mnstar1959 (+)	ML31 wrote: Who gives a crap what he did in Congress? That whole thing was a worthless circus. Not sure why you are swayed by that. Looking at the names you wrote, I 'd have to say McGwire: In. Bonds: In. Palmeiro: Out. Thome: Out. Thomas: Out. Rameriz.... Who? Arod: In. None of them shamed the game more than any owner has. And none is even close to ruining the game like Bud Selig. I will agree about Selig, worst Commissioner in my lifetime. My spelling error; It was Manny (Man-Ram, Manny being Manny) from the Dodgers can't spell his last name for the life of me. Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#35 \| 37 days ago ML31 (+)	mnstar1959 wrote: I will agree about Selig, worst Commissioner in my lifetime. My spelling error; It was Manny (Man-Ram, Manny being Manny) from the Dodgers can't spell his last name for the life of me. Ah... Manny is borderline. Need more time to evaluate him. Selig's line of damage to the game will be legendary. He presided over the biggest drop in national popularity the game has ever had. He killed pennant races. Under his watch, the All-Star-Game is no longer must see viewing. He allow the playoffs to go so long the WS will be played in NOVEMBER! A couple of those things were not really his doing, but if he had any kind of spine he could have stopped it.
	2
#36 \| 36 days ago rags684 (+)	ML31 wrote: Jackson: Banned list. Rose. I saw him play. Lots. And I 100% believe he manipulated his team based on what games he was wagering on and not what the game situation dictated. Hodges: One season does not a Hall of Famer make. Just ask Roger Maris. Murphy: Good. But not Hall of Fame good. Dawson: Good. Not Hall of Fame Good. Garvey: You have got to be effing kidding. i am so glad that we have a baseball expert like yourself in our mist.......the question was who we thought should be there,it really wasn't asked who we thought that "YOU"thought should be there so you can pick your reasons for not liking our picks. Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#37 \| 36 days ago rags684 (+)	i seen from your profile that you are all of 44 years old......wow....and i'm heading into 61 years old i'm sure i have seen a game or 2 more than you on the television and may have even atteneded game or 2 more than you,and yet i just don't get that warm cozy feeling that you are the baseball guru. Enter the poll to see my answer
	3
#38 \| 36 days ago ML31 (+)	rags684 wrote: i am so glad that we have a baseball expert like yourself in our mist.......the question was who we thought should be there,it really wasn't asked who we thought that "YOU"thought should be there so you can pick your reasons for not liking our picks. Too bad it is you and not Bud Selig who sees me as the baseball expert. I am well aware of the question. Is there some kind of rule against reacting to what others write in a public forum?
	2
#39 \| 36 days ago ML31 (+)	rags684 wrote: i seen from your profile that you are all of 44 years old......wow....and i'm heading into 61 years old i'm sure i have seen a game or 2 more than you on the television and may have even atteneded game or 2 more than you,and yet i just don't get that warm cozy feeling that you are the baseball guru. If you have a beef against something I wrote then address it. Sports arguments are what these threads are about. And I find them entertaining. If not, then stop whining that someone responded to your post with something other than, "you are 100% correct."
	2
#40 \| 35 days ago rags684 (+)	(Edited by rags684) ML31 wrote: If you have a beef against something I wrote then address it. Sports arguments are what these threads are about. And I find them entertaining. If not, then stop whining that someone responded to your post with something other than, "you are 100% correct." i don't think i sugar coated it i'm pretty sure without using language that i can't use here on the form told you what a jerk and a idiot you are for putting down everyone's pick.......mark mcgwire????? really???? that's the best you can do????mr.steroid himself....and i could gave a crap less what he done to congress he was a cheat just as much as you say pete rose was or shoeless joe jackson and even though he never stands a chance of getting into the hall of fame i would rather see a man like roger maris get into the hall than a pee on like mcgwire.....no sugar coating. Enter the poll to see my answer
	3
#41 \| 35 days ago rags684 (+)	ML31 wrote: Jackson: Banned list. Rose. I saw him play. Lots. And I 100% believe he manipulated his team based on what games he was wagering on and not what the game situation dictated. Hodges: One season does not a Hall of Famer make. Just ask Roger Maris. Murphy: Good. But not Hall of Fame good. Dawson: Good. Not Hall of Fame Good. Garvey: You have got to be effing kidding. here's a few facts that has escaped you about gil hodges but i am sure you knew them but just in case you forgot in the 1950's most domiant right hand batter 5 consecutive seasons of hitting 30 or more home runs 2 seasons of hitting 40 or more home runs 8 time all star........and all without the use of steriods. here is a free piece of advice.......maybe you should study the history of baseball rather than just sticking to a couple of decades you know best or a player you seen the most of. Enter the poll to see my answer
	4
#42 \| 35 days ago mnstar1959 (+)	rags684 wrote: here's a few facts that has escaped you about gil hodges but i am sure you knew them but just in case you forgot in the 1950's most domiant right hand batter 5 consecutive seasons of hitting 30 or more home runs 2 seasons of hitting 40 or more home runs 8 time all star........and all without the use of steriods. here is a free piece of advice.......maybe you should study the history of baseball rather than just sticking to a couple of decades you know best or a player you seen the most of. Thanks Rags684; I only knew of him, Gil Hodges, as the Mets manager in 1969. I knew he played but didn't know any numbers associated with him. Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#43 \| 35 days ago ML31 (+)	rags684 wrote: i don't think i sugar coated it i'm pretty sure without using language that i can't use here on the form told you what a jerk and a idiot you are for putting down everyone's pick.......mark mcgwire????? really???? that's the best you can do????mr.steroid himself....and i could gave a crap less what he done to congress he was a cheat just as much as you say pete rose was or shoeless joe jackson and even though he never stands a chance of getting into the hall of fame i would rather see a man like roger maris get into the hall than a pee on like mcgwire.....no sugar coating. I never claimed that Jackson or Rose cheated. I merely said they were on the banned list for a reason. Again, you are being blinded because someone dares to point out your flawed line of thinking. You did indeed make if very clear that you cannot handle it when someone uses evidence and facts to show why your personal picks were not the best. I'd say you need to mature a bit here, but at 59 I'm not sure that is possible for you anymore.

#44 \| 35 days ago ML31 (+)	rags684 wrote: here's a few facts that has escaped you about gil hodges but i am sure you knew them but just in case you forgot in the 1950's most domiant right hand batter 5 consecutive seasons of hitting 30 or more home runs 2 seasons of hitting 40 or more home runs 8 time all star........and all without the use of steriods. here is a free piece of advice.......maybe you should study the history of baseball rather than just sticking to a couple of decades you know best or a player you seen the most of. I am well aware of Gil Hodges stats. But thank your for displaying your ignorance. Let me make you a bit more aware of things. Most of the BBWA disagrees with me on this, but a nice 5 year run is hardly enough to put someone in the Hall. Hodges was good, but not Hall good. As far as him being "clean", you need to open your eyes. I don't think any player has been "clean" since they started getting paid over a century ago. Hodges, like pretty much every player of his era or even ever, was taking anything he could to make his game better. You have no idea what he may or may not have done. Many of the old timers who are still around from that era claim there was all kinds of stuff available to any player who opted to partake. Please, get over yourself regarding how "clean" baseball was back in the day.
	1
#45 \| 34 days ago Blues_is_blood (+)	This idea just went through my head (not that there's anything there to stop it): If players have been taking performance enhancing stuff/betting on baseball/throwing world series games pretty much since the beginning of the sport, there seems to be, in my opinion, only two options: 1. Shut down the hall of fame altogether because this is the only way to ensure that the cheaters don't get in. 2. Accept that-like it or not-these things are part of the sport,deal with it and start judging players on their stats. I will give y'all a few examples. Up here in new england, I have heard a few baseball people say that Jim Rice didn't get into the hall until his last year of eligibility because he wasn't always nice to the press. I'm not taking his side, just saying a players attitude towards the media wasn't a criteria for the HOF, the last time I checked. It seems like kind of a childish way to handle things. Second is Pete Rose. He admited to betting on baseball as a manager, not as a player. If he got into the hall, it would be for his stats as a player. The intensity he played with makes it hard for me to believe he bet on games as a player. Therefore, I would let him in. Finally, Mark McGwire. If it can be proven that he would not have HOF numbers without steroids, then he should not get in. Otherwise, give him a spot. The world is far from perfect. Wishing does not make it any more so. Just my thoughts,
	4
#46 \| 34 days ago rags684 (+)	Blues_is_blood wrote: This idea just went through my head (not that there's anything there to stop it): If players have been taking performance enhancing stuff/betting on baseball/throwing world series games pretty much since the beginning of the sport, there seems to be, in my opinion, only two options: 1. Shut down the hall of fame altogether because this is the only way to ensure that the cheaters don't get in. 2. Accept that-like it or not-these things are part of the sport,deal with it and start judging players on their stats. I will give y'all a few examples. Up here in new england, I have heard a few baseball people say that Jim Rice didn't get into the hall until his last year of eligibility because he wasn't always nice to the press. I'm not taking his side, just saying a players attitude towards the media wasn't a criteria for the HOF, the last time I checked. It seems like kind of a childish way to handle things. Second is Pete Rose. He admited to betting on baseball as a manager, not as a player. If he got into the hall, it would be for his stats as a player. The intensity he played with makes it hard for me to believe he bet on games as a player. Therefore, I would let him in. Finally, Mark McGwire. If it can be proven that he would not have HOF numbers without steroids, then he should not get in. Otherwise, give him a spot. The world is far from perfect. Wishing does not make it any more so. Just my thoughts, i don't believe there is a right or wrong answer here as most poll question's are this one is subjective........the answer is very simple who are the player's you would like to see in the hall of fame......not which one's done the right thing's or wrong thing's.....my childhood hero willie mayes was kept out of the hall for many year's cause he advertised for a casino.......roger maris for whatever reason's has been kept out so right or wrong there is no right or wrong just your point of view. Enter the poll to see my answer
	3
#47 \| 34 days ago ML31 (+)	Blues_is_blood wrote: This idea just went through my head (not that there's anything there to stop it): If players have been taking performance enhancing stuff/betting on baseball/throwing world series games pretty much since the beginning of the sport, there seems to be, in my opinion, only two options: 1. Shut down the hall of fame altogether because this is the only way to ensure that the cheaters don't get in. 2. Accept that-like it or not-these things are part of the sport,deal with it and start judging players on their stats. I will give y'all a few examples. Up here in new england, I have heard a few baseball people say that Jim Rice didn't get into the hall until his last year of eligibility because he wasn't always nice to the press. I'm not taking his side, just saying a players attitude towards the media wasn't a criteria for the HOF, the last time I checked. It seems like kind of a childish way to handle things. Second is Pete Rose. He admited to betting on baseball as a manager, not as a player. If he got into the hall, it would be for his stats as a player. The intensity he played with makes it hard for me to believe he bet on games as a player. Therefore, I would let him in. Finally, Mark McGwire. If it can be proven that he would not have HOF numbers without steroids, then he should not get in. Otherwise, give him a spot. The world is far from perfect. Wishing does not make it any more so. Just my thoughts, I would tend to lean towards option #2. Especially because of the money they make, players will always be looking for anything, legal or not, to give them an edge. Like it or not, it is a fact. You are right, attitude is technically not a Hall of Fame criteria. However, the writers are the ones who vote. And they tend to hold grudges. If enough of them feel a player was surly to them, they will withhold their votes. No, it's not fair. But that's the way it is. On top of that, Rice was borderline anyway. So he was even easier to not vote for. He had to wait until there was a lean year for quality Hall of Famers. Rose: Pete Rose the man bet on baseball while managing a team. It is not possible to punish Pete Rose the man while enshrining Pete Rose the player. If you can find a way to do that, I will be the first to say they should enshrine Rose the player. Until then, Pete Rose the man is banned from baseball.
	3
#48 \| 34 days ago ML31 (+)	rags684 wrote: i don't believe there is a right or wrong answer here as most poll question's are this one is subjective........the answer is very simple who are the player's you would like to see in the hall of fame......not which one's done the right thing's or wrong thing's.....my childhood hero willie mayes was kept out of the hall for many year's cause he advertised for a casino.......roger maris for whatever reason's has been kept out so right or wrong there is no right or wrong just your point of view. I need to correct you on something. Mays was never kept out of the Hall of Fame for working for a casino. He was elected his first year of eligibility. Retired after the '73 season. Five years later was October '78. The first Hall of Fame vote to take place with his name on the ballot was January 1979. He was enshrined that year. It sounds like you are confusing the Hall of Fame induction with the foolish decision Bowie Kuhn made about Mays and Mantle. Claiming that as long as they worked for a casino, they would be barred from MLB functions. A decision that Peter Uberoth immediately overturned as soon as he took over as Commissioner.
	2
#49 \| 34 days ago rags684 (+)	ML31 wrote: I need to correct you on something. Mays was never kept out of the Hall of Fame for working for a casino. He was elected his first year of eligibility. Retired after the '73 season. Five years later was October '78. The first Hall of Fame vote to take place with his name on the ballot was January 1979. He was enshrined that year. It sounds like you are confusing the Hall of Fame induction with the foolish decision Bowie Kuhn made about Mays and Mantle. Claiming that as long as they worked for a casino, they would be barred from MLB functions. A decision that Peter Uberoth immediately overturned as soon as he took over as Commissioner. i stand corrected Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#50 \| 32 days ago packersangels (+)	definatly shoeless joe but pete rose is a embarassment to the game of baseball and i hope he never get in Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#51 \| 32 days ago mnstar1959 (+)	Again....No one else gets in until Byleven gets in Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#52 \| 32 days ago buckhntr (+)	auntwisa wrote: Hands down Pete Rose. My God, if Michael Vick can play ball again after the atrocities that he inflicted on animals.........Pete Rose should be inducted into the Hall of Fame. Sure he bet on sports, but never when his team was playing. bullshit
	2
#53 \| 30 days ago LLUmpJimWard (+)	While I would love to see Dale Murphy get in, Bert needs to be in Cooperstown! The voters need to get up off their backsides and get this man into the Hall of Fame where is justly belongs! Enter the poll to see my answer
	3
#54 \| 27 days ago mrturk (+)	Bert Blyleven and Jack Morris. Both were the top pitcher on multiple world series winners and were steady if not spectacular performers for many years. Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#55 \| 27 days ago elevenbravo138again (+)	Bert Blyleven, Ron Santo, Jim Kaat, Jack Morris, Gil Hodges, Shoeless Joe Jackson, Pete Rose but how about Buck O'Neil?! Enter the poll to see my answer
	3
#56 \| 27 days ago Pat (+)	elevenbravo138again wrote: Bert Blyleven, Ron Santo, Jim Kaat, Jack Morris, Gil Hodges, Shoeless Joe Jackson, Pete Rose but how about Buck O'Neil?! Can't believe it took this long for people to mention the guy who was the first one that game to mind, for me. The conversation begins and ends with Buck O'Neil for me. I wouldn't object to Shoeless Joe Jackson getting in as well, but I could do without the rest of them. And sorry, Cubs fans. Ron Santo is NOT a Hall of Famer, and never should be. That would devalue the honor.
	4
#57 \| 27 days ago jasonwrites (+)	You're right, Buck O'Neil should be there and I'm ashamed he was overlooked so long even in this poll, and especially by me. Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#58 \| 27 days ago USMC_0369_8541 (+)	Pete Rose, Andre Dawson, Gil Hodges

#59 \| 21 days ago SuperStar123 (+)	JUST PUUT PETE ROSE & SHOELESS JOE JACKSON IN AND I'LL BE HAPPY FOR AWHILE!!! Enter the poll to see my answer
	4
#60 \| 21 days ago SuperStar123 (+)	ML31 wrote: I never claimed that Jackson or Rose cheated. I merely said they were on the banned list for a reason. Again, you are being blinded because someone dares to point out your flawed line of thinking. You did indeed make if very clear that you cannot handle it when someone uses evidence and facts to show why your personal picks were not the best. I'd say you need to mature a bit here, but at 59 I'm not sure that is possible for you anymore. HEY, I'M 60 AND HAVE BEEN A FAN, AND PLAYED. THE GUY WAS TRYING TO SETTLE IT BY LETTING IT GO IN HIS LAST POST. WHY DON'T YOU LET IT GO? THAT'S REAL IMMATURITY & I CAN CALL IT BECAUSE I'M A RETIRED CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST. TAKE A DEEP BREATH!! Enter the poll to see my answer
	3
#61 \| 21 days ago machetto (+)	First start with Joe Jackson. Think about it. The guy had a lifetime ban, but Shoeless Joe isn't alive anymore. How can a lifetime ban apply to someone who is already dead? Pete Rose belongs too, but that's another story. Enter the poll to see my answer
	3
#62 \| 21 days ago ML31 (+)	SuperStar123 wrote: HEY, I'M 60 AND HAVE BEEN A FAN, AND PLAYED. THE GUY WAS TRYING TO SETTLE IT BY LETTING IT GO IN HIS LAST POST. WHY DON'T YOU LET IT GO? THAT'S REAL IMMATURITY & I CAN CALL IT BECAUSE I'M A RETIRED CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST. TAKE A DEEP BREATH!! If you are a clinical psycologist, then you are a very poor one. It was pathetically obvious he was NOT trying to settle anything. In fact, he was escalating it. You want to know about maturity? I wasn't the one calling another poster a "jerk" or an "idiot". I am, however, unsure if you wink was for the entire post or just the final line. Impossible to tell.

#63 \| 21 days ago Pat (+)	ML31 wrote: If you are a clinical psycologist, then you are a very poor one. It was pathetically obvious he was NOT trying to settle anything. In fact, he was escalating it. You want to know about maturity? I wasn't the one calling another poster a "jerk" or an "idiot". I am, however, unsure if you wink was for the entire post or just the final line. Impossible to tell. Not to mention that was comment was from 14 days ago.
	1
#64 \| 20 days ago SuperStar123 (+)	SuperStar123 wrote: HEY, I'M 60 AND HAVE BEEN A FAN, AND PLAYED. THE GUY WAS TRYING TO SETTLE IT BY LETTING IT GO IN HIS LAST POST. WHY DON'T YOU LET IT GO? THAT'S REAL IMMATURITY & I CAN CALL IT BECAUSE I'M A RETIRED CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST. TAKE A DEEP BREATH!! I might have gotten confused on who started it. If I did, I'm sorry. Because in that case you are in the right! The wink was for you, to say, I didn't disagree with your point of view. :-) And I was a VERY GOOD Clinical Psychologist. Just have to determine which one I'm diagnosing! LOL! Have a great day! Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#65 \| 20 days ago mnstar1959 (+)	SuperStar123 wrote: JUST PUUT PETE ROSE & SHOELESS JOE JACKSON IN AND I'LL BE HAPPY FOR AWHILE!!! Shoeless ok, but Pete must wait until after Death.....not allowed the priviledge of membership...... Enter the poll to see my answer
	2
#66 \| 16 days ago CowboyFan1 (+)	Shoeless and Pete...Tommy John,Blyeven, McGwire,Dawson,Murphy...to name a few.

#67 \| 16 days ago rogercarver1960 (+)	The way players are jumping from team to team today, criteria for qualifying for the HOF might have to be adjusted. Enter the poll to see my answer

#68 \| 16 days ago Pat (+)	rogercarver1960 wrote: The way players are jumping from team to team today, criteria for qualifying for the HOF might have to be adjusted. I don't understand... what does that have to do with anything?

#69 \| 16 days ago mnstar1959 (+)	rogercarver1960 wrote: The way players are jumping from team to team today, criteria for qualifying for the HOF might have to be adjusted. Huh? please explain what you mean. Enter the poll to see my answer

#70 \| 16 days ago ML31 (+)	rogercarver1960 wrote: The way players are jumping from team to team today, criteria for qualifying for the HOF might have to be adjusted. In my view, that doesn't change anything except create a reason to include a borderline player. If a player is borderline, the fact that he played his career for one team would push him over the top in my book. Rice was a perfect example. He was on the bubble but then I realized he only played for the Sox. That is a rare feat. So he gets in.

#71 \| 15 days ago Cardsfan5 (+)	Mark McGwire and Pete Rose Enter the poll to see my answer

#72 \| 13 days ago mikeam7 (+)	Pete Rose

#73 \| 5 days ago dragonzblade3232 (+)	jasonwrites wrote: First thoughts... 1) Bert Byleven. 287 wins, 2-time All-Star. 3.31 career ERA, 3701 K, WHIP>1.2. Played on a lot of noncontenders, but in 3 playoff appearances: 5-1, 2.47, 2 World Series Championships (1979 Pirates, 1987 Twins). Not sure what else you're supposed to do to get in... except the arbitrary 300 wins. 2) Dale Murphy. OK, this is a sentimental vote, because he was my favorite player on my favorite team growing up. From 1980-1987 he was arguably the best player in the National League. 7-time All-Star (6 in a row 1982-7), 2-time NL MVP (1982-3), 5 consecutive Gold Gloves, 4 consecutive Silver Sluggers, Lou Gehrig Award, Roberto Clemente Award. Unfortunately after 1987 his skills went into decline, and his BA declined significantly as he seemed to swing at any down-and-away pitch. Finally his bad knees ended his career at age 37 in 1993, at age 37, as a member of the inaugural Colorado Rockies team. Unfortunately, playing a handful of home games in Denver didn't help him get the last two home runs he needed to reach 400. Dale Murphy you need 8 years of great playing years to be a Hall of Famer if he was good one more season he would be in the Hall of Fame Enter the poll to see my answer

#74 \| 5 days ago twins_10m (+)	sdm wrote: I totally agree - if Jim Rice is in the Hall then Dawson should be in also. Compare their stats - Dawson kills Rice. And poor Bert? Imagine if he actually played for a good team? Get these guys in and stop playing your silly political games. Bert was on the 87 ws champs roster and was a big part, let him in already! Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#75 \| 5 days ago twins_10m (+)	Also don't forget about pete pose. Enter the poll to see my answer

#76 \| 5 days ago twins_10m (+)	Blues_is_blood wrote: Here's my 3... 1. Pete Rose. 24 seasons. 17-time all-star. Almost 16,000 plate appearances. Member of baseball's all-century team. No one has more hits, and come on...name one player that has played harder or at more positions than Rose. Apparently though, he wasn't physically able to do any of these things unless he had money riding on it (if you listen to the sportswriters tell it). Cut the crap and put him in the hall where he belongs! 2. Alan Trammell. Only 5 shortstops have won more gold gloves than his 4. Career fielding pct. is .977 (Ozzie Smith's is .978). Career BA is .285. Played in a smaller market so he didn't have the exposure of a Ripken or the flash of Smith, but for 20 seasons he simply got the job done. 3. Jack Morris. No pitcher had more wins in the 80's than Morris. 254 for his career with almost 2500 K's. Three 20 win seasons. Led 4 teams to WS titles. Career numbers are comparable to Drysdale, Gibson, and Feller--all in the hall. What do y'all think? Ur right about morris, what about 91. please. anyone? Enter the poll to see my answer

#77 \| 2 days ago vindog (+)	Don Mattingly! ENOUGH SAID Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#78 \| 2 days ago jasonwrites (+)	The more I think about it, the more I think there shouldn't be such a thing as a "borderline" Hall of Famer. If there's any doubt to his belonging in the Hall, then leave him out. Keep it the elite of the elite. Enter the poll to see my answer

#79 \| 2 days ago TheRoss (+)	- Dale Murphy - Mark McGwire - Andre Dawson - Buck O'Neil - Shoeless Joe Jackson - Bert Byleven - Alan Trammell - Jack Morris

#80 \| 2 days ago ML31 (+)	jasonwrites wrote: The more I think about it, the more I think there shouldn't be such a thing as a "borderline" Hall of Famer. If there's any doubt to his belonging in the Hall, then leave him out. Keep it the elite of the elite. That is pretty close to a general rule I have. If I have to think about if he should be a Hall of Famer or not, then he probably isn't.

#81 \| 2 days ago jasonwrites (+)	TheRoss wrote: - Dale Murphy - Mark McGwire - Andre Dawson - Buck O'Neil - Shoeless Joe Jackson - Bert Byleven - Alan Trammell - Jack Morris With the exception of O'Neil, I'd say all of those are in the borderline category and most likely will never make it. Unfortunately Murph just deteroiated in his last few years. He looked like he was batting with a broom, because he would swing and miss at any pitch low and away and everyone in the NL figured that out pretty quickly. I wouldn't vote for McGwire. All he did was hit home runs. He had what, a .260 lifetime average? And he was a below average fielder. Even if 'roids had never come into the picture, I don't think he's HoF material. Bonds, however, is a no-brainer. Enter the poll to see my answer

#82 \| 2 days ago ML31 (+)	jasonwrites wrote: With the exception of O'Neil, I'd say all of those are in the borderline category and most likely will never make it. Unfortunately Murph just deteroiated in his last few years. He looked like he was batting with a broom, because he would swing and miss at any pitch low and away and everyone in the NL figured that out pretty quickly. I wouldn't vote for McGwire. All he did was hit home runs. He had what, a .260 lifetime average? And he was a below average fielder. Even if 'roids had never come into the picture, I don't think he's HoF material. Bonds, however, is a no-brainer. Actually, McGwire was a better fielder than you think. While he was no gold glove he was an above average first baseman. His numbers are very similar to Reggie Jackson. All he did was hit home runs and he's in the Hall. And McGwire was a far better first baseman than Reggie was a right fielder. Some would say that Reggie shouldn't be in either and there is some merit to that. I'm just playing devil's advocate here. BTW... McGwire should be in the Hall for the home runs alone. Like it or not, homers are the king of all stats. It is a sexy stat. Homers open more eyes than on base %.

#83 \| 40 hrs ago jasonwrites (+)	ML31 wrote: Actually, McGwire was a better fielder than you think. While he was no gold glove he was an above average first baseman. His numbers are very similar to Reggie Jackson. All he did was hit home runs and he's in the Hall. And McGwire was a far better first baseman than Reggie was a right fielder. Some would say that Reggie shouldn't be in either and there is some merit to that. I'm just playing devil's advocate here. BTW... McGwire should be in the Hall for the home runs alone. Like it or not, homers are the king of all stats. It is a sexy stat. Homers open more eyes than on base %. Well of course... being a Braves fan especially I will never forget the infamous Glavine & Maddux commercial, "Chicks Dig the Long Ball." Reggie Jackson is in the Hall because... wait, where's our friend Dragon?... he was a... ding ding ding... Yankee! Enter the poll to see my answer

#84 \| 40 hrs ago ML31 (+)	jasonwrites wrote: Well of course... being a Braves fan especially I will never forget the infamous Glavine & Maddux commercial, "Chicks Dig the Long Ball." Reggie Jackson is in the Hall because... wait, where's our friend Dragon?... he was a... ding ding ding... Yankee! He played 9 years for the A's. A mere 5 for the Yankees. He was far more an Athletic than a Yankee. The fact that he is wearing a Yankee hat on his plaque is laughable. And part of the reason players no longer have a say in what they they have displayed on their plaque. I hate using this example because the fundamental premise is just wrong to begin with, but here goes.... If Reggie Jackson is a Hall of Famer, then so is Mark McGwire.

#85 \| 39 hrs ago dragonzblade3232 (+)	jasonwrites wrote: Well of course... being a Braves fan especially I will never forget the infamous Glavine & Maddux commercial, "Chicks Dig the Long Ball." Reggie Jackson is in the Hall because... wait, where's our friend Dragon?... he was a... ding ding ding... Yankee! LOL I agree Reggie isn't a hall of fame athlete. He may be but not as a Yankee. Dave Winfield is really a Yankee his number isn't retired and he spend most his Career with the Yankees. You can reverse them two. Dave has 500 more hits or something like that also. Enter the poll to see my answer

#86 \| 39 hrs ago ML31 (+)	dragonzblade3232 wrote: LOL I agree Reggie isn't a hall of fame athlete. He may be but not as a Yankee. Dave Winfield is really a Yankee his number isn't retired and he spend most his Career with the Yankees. You can reverse them two. Dave has 500 more hits or something like that also. Yes, Winfield should have had the Yankee logo on his Hall of Fame plaque. But he sure doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame. Not one bit. Not even close.

#87 \| 30 hrs ago mnstar1959 (+)	TheRoss wrote: - Dale Murphy - Mark McGwire - Andre Dawson - Buck O'Neil - Shoeless Joe Jackson - Bert Byleven - Alan Trammell - Jack Morris I can only agree on 3 of these......O'Neil, pioneer in Negro League, Jackson, great hitter and we are a forgiving people, Byleven, should have been in 5 yrs ago Enter the poll to see my answer

#88 \| 30 hrs ago mnstar1959 (+)	ML31 wrote: Yes, Winfield should have had the Yankee logo on his Hall of Fame plaque. But he sure doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame. Not one bit. Not even close. 3000 hits aren't sexy enough? 475 hrs(?) same as Gehrig. Winfield has a better class than Jackson being in Enter the poll to see my answer

#89 \| 28 hrs ago ML31 (+)	(Edited by ML31) mnstar1959 wrote: 3000 hits aren't sexy enough? 475 hrs(?) same as Gehrig. Winfield has a better class than Jackson being in No. 3000 hits is not sexy enough. While the totals are similar, you can't ever convince me that Dave Winfield is just as good a hitter as Lou Gherig! Reggie is a weird case. When you look at his numbers one would think, no way is he a Hall of Famer! But he was such a larger than life character. For some reason him hitting three homers in one World Series game seems to have people thinking he is greater than he really is. I am of the opinion that him doing that in New York City was what got him in the Hall. Reggie is a perfect example of how playing in New York makes good players appear great. If he played those 5 years in Oakland he would not be in the Hall. Even if he won 2 more World Series' there.

#90 \| 27 hrs ago Pat (+)	Something to note, with the absurd Winfield-Gehrig comparison, which should never have been made, EVER, is that Gehrig played in far less games, and had far fewer at bats. Gehrig's career batting average was .57 higher, and his career OPS is .253 higher. That's not even remotely close. Any attempts to compare the two of them are simply absurd, and should probably just be ignored.
	1
#91 \| 20 hrs ago dragonzblade3232 (+)	(Edited by dragonzblade3232) If we have to go on the Past baseball players for the Hall of Fame, then really no one are Hall of Famers. Just end it right there. But we should go by what happens in the Era. Rather then depending on only the past sports history. Example Derek Jeter is a hall of famer, because he a multiple time champion and good even years with great numbers. He also a good defender. Are they Ruthian no but are anyone else no. Then you have to take account, steroids in them terms he more of a Hall of Famer then even A-Rod and Bonds. If 3000 hits isn't impressive to people, then look at this only 27 people in history done this feat. Only 25 people hit 500 Home Runs ever. Showing the feats are equally as hard to do. Only a few players done both feats, not even the best baseball player ever got 3000 hits, his name is Babe Ruth. Hits aren't as sexy as Home Runs, but in a lot of cases they can be equally as important. Me I would take a steady average hitter any-day, rather then streaky power hitters. For pitching wins, only 24 people won at least 300 games. This is also very impressive. That feat will never happen again, because pitchers get five days off rather then four. Like back in the day. I can also see in the future, six days off it started with some teams already. Enter the poll to see my answer

#92 \| 16 hrs ago jasonwrites (+)	Pat wrote: Something to note, with the absurd Winfield-Gehrig comparison, which should never have been made, EVER, is that Gehrig played in far less games, and had far fewer at bats. Gehrig's career batting average was .57 higher, and his career OPS is .253 higher. That's not even remotely close. Any attempts to compare the two of them are simply absurd, and should probably just be ignored. Indeed, I think even Dave Winfield himself would laugh at the absurdity of comparing his career to Lou Gehrig's. Gehrig had a marvelous career. It's somewht of a misfortune that his legacy is dominated by three things: 1) the consecutive games streak, 2) how he died, and 3) the difficulty of playing much of his career in Ruth's shadow. Enter the poll to see my answer
	1
#93 \| 16 hrs ago dragonzblade3232 (+)	(Edited by dragonzblade3232) jasonwrites wrote: Indeed, I think even Dave Winfield himself would laugh at the absurdity of comparing his career to Lou Gehrig's. Gehrig had a marvelous career. It's somewht of a misfortune that his legacy is dominated by three things: 1) the consecutive games streak, 2) how he died, and 3) the difficulty of playing much of his career in Ruth's shadow. No baseball player alive should say they are as good as Lou Gehrig, because maybe two people ever are better or as good as him that of course Babe Ruth and Ted Williams? Them three will be the top three for ever. Enter the poll to see my answer

#94 \| 15 hrs ago ML31 (+)	dragonzblade3232 wrote: No baseball player alive should say they are as good as Lou Gehrig, because maybe two people ever are better or as good as him that of course Babe Ruth and Ted Williams? Them three will be the top three for ever. Bonds is in the Gherig-Williams-Ruth territory as well. So don't say forever.

#95 \| 15 hrs ago dragonzblade3232 (+)	ML31 wrote: Bonds is in the Gherig-Williams-Ruth territory as well. So don't say forever. No he is not. He all Juiced up Babe did it on Beer Enter the poll to see my answer

#96 \| 14 hrs ago ML31 (+)	dragonzblade3232 wrote: No he is not. He all Juiced up Babe did it on Beer Yes, he is. Bonds was the most feared hitter of his era. No, the "juice" did not magically make the balls fly further. If you buy into that, then it wasn't Ruth who hit those home runs, it was the "juiced" ball that was introduced just for him. Every era has something. And every player took advantage of whatever it was. To think otherwise is to be naive at the highest level.

#97 \| 13 hrs ago dragonzblade3232 (+)	(Edited by dragonzblade3232) But everyone else was hitting the same ball. Not everyone today is taking steroids, so its not fair to compare. I know guys who drink like 3 pots of coffee. Enter the poll to see my answer

#98 \| 13 hrs ago ML31 (+)	dragonzblade3232 wrote: But everyone else was hitting the same ball. Not everyone today is taking steroids, so its not fair to compare. I know guys who drink like 3 pots of coffee. Doesn't change the fact that the game changed to make Ruth better. Everyone does whatever they can to make themselves better. Bonds and Ruth were no different from anyone else. So it is completely fair to compare.