The National Baseball Hall of Fame announced its inducting class of 2007 today. I gotta admit, I’m a little ticked. And it’s not because Mark McGwire only garnered 23.5% of the vote. (Although if these ridiculous voters are going to take the moral high ground on Big Mac, then they’d better not vote for Bonds. Or Sosa. Or Palmeiro. Or Sheffield. Or Piazza. Or Clemens. Or Bagwell. Or Pudge. Or any of the dozens of superstars whose names are associated with performance enhancing drugs. But that’s another blog altogether.)
What upsets me is that some of the Baseball Writers of America didn’t vote for Cal Ripken Jr. and Tony Gwynn. 6 of these buffoons left Ripken off their ballot; 11 did the same with Gwynn. Not only are Ripken & Gwynn Hall of Fame talents; they’re world class people. Leaving them off your ballot is a gross misuse of the voting privilege, a travesty.
Paul Ladewski, a columnist for the Daily Southtown in Chicago, says he left his ballot blank because he can’t vote for anyone who played in the “Steroid Era”. What? You’re telling me that when Greg Maddux hangs ’em up, you’re not voting for him? Gimme a break. The guy looks like an accountant. We’ll see, Ladewski.
I’m a baseball purist, but these guys are over the top. There’s a stream of thought among some HOF voters that says no player ever deserves unanimous induction. “If Babe Ruth didn’t get 100%, then neither should Ripken.” These doofwads function as the self-appointed conscience of Cooperstown. Well, way to go, boys. Just when you think baseball can’t embarrass itself any more…
Here’s my question: What’s your criteria for HOF voting? What kind of messed up, bizzaro-world are you living in when a lifetime .338 hitter is NOT a first ballot Hall of Famer? 3,141 hits; 8 batting titles; 15 All-Star appearances….nah, come back next year Tony. You don’t really meet my standards.
Or how about Ripken? Rookie of the Year; 2-time MVP; 19 All-Star appearances. And oh yeah…he showed up to work everyday for 16 years. His consecutive games played streak single-handedly saved baseball in the aftermath of the ’94 strike. But I see your point, Paul.
How is it that a dope like this guy gets a HOF vote? You don’t want your vote, Paul? Send it to me. (I write about baseball on occasion, you know!) Send it to somebody who cares. Send it to somebody who values Gwynn’s scientific approach to the art of hitting. Send it to somebody who values the perseverance of Ripken’s streak. Send it to somebody who understands that being a great player takes a back seat to being a great human being.
Cal, Tony, you deserved better. You’re both first ballot in my book.
already & not yet 
Big Mac gets in next year, voters just didn’t want him to get in the first shot.
I don’t know. After listening to a lot of voters on talk radio, seems like a lot of them want to punish him for a lot longer. Either way, they clearly got their point across this year.
“His consecutive games played streak single-handedly saved baseball in the aftermath of the ’94 strike.”Did I read that right? Didn’t you once nearly stone me for making that same statement?The problem is that MLB faces a major integrity problem. They need to be given every opportunity to fix it. Media voting on the Hall of Fame is a joke.
I have my doubts about Big Mac getting in ever, and I definitely don’t see him making up enough ground in one year to get in. I guess next year is finally Gossage’s turn. He’s up over 70% and would only need to pull in a few more votes to get to 75%.I’ll be a witness on that for you Scott. I remember a couple of those “Cal Ripken Saved Baseball” arguments between you guys. Pretty heated discussions. Almost as heated as the discussions on the cinematic masterpiece that is Con Air.
I knew that was coming. Well I sure can’t say that Big Mac and Sosa saved baseball anymore. I can’t remember what my point was in the whole Ripken debate. I concede: he saved baseball. But no way was Pacino gonna whack Donnie Brasco…
The only way I can see anyone not voting Cal or Tony is that you forgot to send in your ballot, we’re sick the day they were calling roll and taking votes, or you sent it in late. It makes me sick that you could NOT vote them in. What, being the hardest working man in baseball and one of the greatest hitters of all time isn’t enough for you?And how brilliant of Ladewski. Let’s punish the several GREAT baseball players and MEN because they played with a few idiots that used steroids. That’s not fair to them, that’s not fair to baseball, and that’s not fair to the MILLIONS of people who love them.That a way to show some class and respect for two of the classiest players to ever walk the field…
Tell me about Con Air…
Maybe Ladewski’s family and Ripken’s family are like mortal enemies back in the old country or something. Maybe Gwynn cued a ball foul back and grazed his laptop. Or maybe he just has it in for classy 3000 hit gamers. Who knows.
Matt / Scott, somebody wanna fill Kenny in on Con Air?
My memory is this: Scott thought Con Air was absolute garbage, a waste of 2 hours of life, the beginning of the end of Nicholas Cage as an actor, etc. While Jason would admit that Con Air was not Oscar material, he stood firm on the position that it was entertaining for what it was – a mindless action movie. This was not good enough for Freeman, who continued seeking a conversion over to the church of anti Con Air, and thus the discussion continued for a while. And when I say “while” I mean a few years. I haven’t been around the two of them together in 7 or 8 years, but I just assume that the battle still rages on. Am I remembering this correctly? Or do I have the roles reversed?
Regarding HOF: on my ballot, Gwynn is a slam-dunk first-ballot. Cal Ripken Jr. gets in, but not first ballot. IMO, Ripken took the Phil Niekro path to the HOF: *good* for a really long time, but *great* only a few years. I know I’m probably in the minority, but somehow I never got all that excited about the Ripken perfect attendance streak. Seems to me things like that are mostly matters of luck.Regarding Con Air: I gather I’m coming in on the tail end of a long discussion, but my recollection is pretty close to Matt’s: a movie that spent it’s budget on casting big names and special effects, and therefore had to buy its screenplay at Scripts ‘R Us. I rented it for $3 and still thought I got ripped off. And please, can’t we have at least one criminal who doesn’t have a goofy middle-name-nickname? Cyrus ‘The Virus’ Grissom… puhleeze….Oh, I almost forgot, the only reason I saw Con-Air was that I was in Las Vegas when they blew up the Sands Hotel for the movie. It was going to be demolished anyway, and they decided to work that into the story (see earlier comment about screenplay).
Eric,Have you ever been to work over 3000 days in a row straight? Have you ever been that committed? Luck? There were days when he had roll out of bed, but he was committed.Wow, that’s really sad someone can feel that way.
Eric,Thanks for dropping by. I’ve already made my case for Ripken’s first-ballot candidacy, but your point about luck being involved is well taken. I suppose Ripken could just’ve easily slipped in the shower one day and injured himself (a la Griffey). It’s tough to quantify, but luck certainly played a part in the perpetuation of the streak. But by and large, I’d attribute the greater credit to Ripken’s perseverance and determination. To hear baseball men talk, that’s just the kind of guy Ripken was. On a side note, I always think about a comment Keith Olbermann made re: Ripken’s streak. He thought it would’ve been classy for Ripken to tie Gehrig’s record and then purposefully sit out the next game so that both their names would be associated with the record. I don’t blame Cal for plugging on, but I always thought that would’ve been a great way to honor another great player & great human.
As for Con Air, I thought I was the one who didn’t care for it too much (never been a Nic Cage fan) but I may be wrong. Your memory is usually much better on these matters, Matt. I guess we’ll need Scott to settle it for us.
Interesting side note: Barry Bonds failed an amphetamine test this year. In 6 or 7 years, it’s possible that the all-time hit king AND the all-time home run king won’t be in the Hall.
Matt is right on all of the particulars except for the reversal: I was the Con Air fan. Jason wasn’t.Of course, the movie sucked. But it was fun.
I enjoyed watching Con Air. Not the best movie, but still worth a watch. Nic Cage killed his career much later.
Isn’t Con Air a type of hair dryer?
Sorry to hit your left anterior Ripken nerve, Lane. To answer your question: no, I’ve never been to work over 3000 days in a row.And neither has Cal Ripken, Jr.Now, don’t get me wrong: going to work on 160-odd selected days during a six-month season followed by six months off is nothing to sneeze at, given the rigors of playing professional baseball. My point is this: long streaks of ANY kind are mostly matters of luck. Ripken should be in the HOF, but because of his 3184 hits and 431 home runs, not because of “The Streak”.We all recognize the truth in the statement that “baseball is a game of inches”. Think of DiMaggio’s 56-game hitting streak. A couple of balls hit a few inches off, or a different scoring decision, and DiMaggio’s streak is 10 games instead of 56. It’s easier to recognize the degree of luck in a streak like that.It’s the same thing with Ripken. He slides into 2nd one day, a shortstop slips on the double-play turn, and Ripken gets conked on the noggin. Concussion. No trainer in the world is going to let him play the next game. Or he hyperextends his thumb on the bag. Or any number of things which could go wrong (mostly all of them beyond his control), and boom, his streak of consecutive games ends.Is there a difference in perseverance or committment between Ripken and the average ballplayer. Sure. His willingness to “play with pain” in some situations is admirable. But there are probably a lot of other players even more committed, even more willing to play through pain, but events beyond their control will keep their consecutive games streaks in double-digits. Long streaks, good or bad, are mostly matters of luck.