He should have just gone off and spent the rest of his life fishing in Florida. When he got irritated when Ryno came back because he was worried about his (Morgan’s) 2B records I put him in the place of “least favorite player”.

just that I don’t like the person. As a player he was very good. I saw him play many times and thought he was the best 2Bman in the game at the time.

That’s pretty much it. That’s pretty much all he’s known for.

He got some sympathy votes on his selection. He wasn’t the worst selection but definitely a borderline case to me.

There is that argument that if Kirby should be in, then Mattingly should be in also. I Don’t know if I accept that, but it is a good argument. I think Kirby got in not only for a sympathy vote, but also his clutch hits in the World Series.

Not only was he the best CF of his own era, he’s one of the 10 best CFs from any era. Can anyone really craft an argument that he should not be in the Hall of Fame?

He had 10 consecutive years of phenomenal performance, in which his lowest OPS+ was a 119. During that stretch, he was pretty much the production equivalent of a Billy Williams, with more OBP and less power, and playing a GG center field.

And Steve Avery is just a horrible analogy. Guy struck out 141 batters at his absolute peak. In 173 innings. And that was after he’d blown out his arm. Prior to that, his K/9 was around 4.5.

He wouldn’t have struck out 3000 hitters if he’d played until he was 60.

Was the other a centerfielder?

A better analogy for Don Mattingly is Dale Murphy. (Who, yes, was a CF for his prime years. But bear with me.)

Both were the premier hitters in the game, suddenly fell off a cliff, and limped along for 5-6 years until their retirement as a shell of their former selves.

Mattingly would have been a no-doubt Hall of Famer if he’d stayed healthy. As it is, however, he wasn’t even the best 1B of his generation. He’s definitely in the 1984-1989 Hall of Fame.

But while Donny can point to 5 years of Hall-Level Production, Kirby can point to 10. While wearing 2 Series rings.

I don’t see this as being particularly close. 2 players with very similar career totals, 1 of whom was a 1B who took 14 years to reach those totals while winning nothing – the other of whom was a CF who reached the same totals in 12 years while winning 2 World Series.

Player A is Ozzie Smith, Player B is Ryno.

Obviously you can’t compare two players from different positions a SS and 2B are fairly similar as middle infielders. It’s not like comparing the defensive numbers of a 1B to a CF.

… his percentage of the vote will have less to do with his defensive prowess (or lack thereof) and more to do with his wacky attitude.

…I guess that I wanted to respond to the entirety of the discussion about Ozzie which is why I was harping on about him being considered “flashy”, a term that you never used. Anyway…

Part of the reason that Ozzie was elected so quickly and overwhelmingly is that he retired at the right time so he didn’t have to compete against any other obvious HOFs on the ballot, as Sandberg did the following few years (Murray, Molitor, Boggs). In other words, Ozzie was lucky enough to show up when there was no line, no waiting. His overwhelming and immediate support was as much a product of the competition as a specific validation of Ozzie.

As for Manny, I think that he should be elected immediately and overwhelmingly. At the plate, he’s among the very best ever and his defensive indifference doesn’t bother me. As Al points out, correctly, he’ll probably be punished for being a goofy guy.

Manny has one clear anecdotal partner, which is Ted Williams. They’re both elite, obsessive hitters who couldn’t be bothered to play defense. Manny’s a harmless eccentric whereas Williams was a bit of a sociopath. The difference, which someone will quickly point out, is that Williams has both a truly admirable record of serving his country as well as a record of saying honest things that others were afraid to say, such as berating the HOF for excluding Negro League players. Williams was actually a better hitter, and he also told anyone who would listen that he was the best hitter ever, but their total packages as baseball players are very similar.

… because he was viewed by the writers as the best defensive SS of his generation. That may not be backed up with stats, either; it may be partly because of the back flips. Seriously. But that shouldn’t necessarily be a criteria for induction.

Smith also contributed mightily to three pennant winners and do not discount the value of the homer he hit in the 1985 NLCS.

hit worth beans. He had a couple of clunker years where he hit in the low 200’s but he had a lot more in the mid .270’s. He didn’t hit for power, but he got on base and scored runs. Maybe you need to look at his stats again. He was at least decent.

If Carter had gotten his way, there still would be no Expo hat on the wall. He wanted a Mets cap on his plaque. If you noticed at the All-Star Game this past season, Carter was wearing an Expos cap but held up a Mets cap when he was introduced in the pre-game ceremonies.

I suppose because of players potentially taking financial incentives (a la Wade Boggs from Tampa Bay) and the potential for a player to pick a team for which he had a limited amount of success that it’s good for the Hall of Fame to pick the logos on the plaques in Cooperstown now. At least Carter showed up for his Hall of Fame induction despite the cap dispute.

Roger Clemens said he wouldn’t show up for his induction, if he had to go in as a Red Sox. It’s one thing for a player to be unhappy with the Hall’s cap choice. I don’t think it’s out of line for a player to complain about that. It’s quite another to say you wouldn’t show up for your induction because of that. That’s just being petty on the player’s part. The funny thing is Clemens might not make it to the Hall anyway because of his alleged use of performance enhancing drugs.

Not only do I not have to admit that, I disagree with that statement with absolute, metaphysical certainty.

Interleague baseball has ruined the World Series and the All-Star Game, and the ratings reflect that. No one gives a rip about seeing AL v. NL anymore, whereas it used to be special.

Extra divisions, and extra rounds of playoffs, have cheapened the regular season, and by extension, the World Series.

“Making the All-Star Game Count” has been largely ignored by everyone involved, and arbitrarily hands homefield advantage to a team that had little or nothing to do with the outcome.

Holding cities hostage in order to build giant, unnecessary stadiums has filled baseball’s coffers on the backs of taxpayers.

Rampant expansion in the 1990’s introduced too many pitchers who were not MLB caliber, and permanently screwed up baseball’s record book — one of its primary assets, and what sets this sport apart from any other.

Turning a blind eye to the steroid issue finished the job. We’re all living in an era in which 755 isn’t the home run leader, and where that record was broken by a cheater. I cannot even tell you the current number for the all-time HR record without checking, and that is really sad.

I believe defense is what separates Dawson from Rice.

…the East Coast bias will help Rice. More beat writes and voting members probably saw Rice on a daily basis because of the markets in which he played.

Dawson, while fantastic as a Cub, was largely forgotten in Montreal, which hurts his “national reputation” per se. By the time Dawson got to Boston, his knees were completely shot.

However, if Rice were to get in, that would only bolster the argument for Dawson.

Also, the Red Sox tend to put a massive media push on “their” candidates, whether they be Rice or whomever. I don’t think or haven’t heard of the Cubs contacting voters to push their candidates, like Dawson.

But they are both marginal candidates (I was addressing the modern-era marginal candidate point above)