This doesn't deal specifically with Palmerio, but we can use him as an example. Doesn't the name "Hall of Fame" imply that the members should be famous? If that is required, I don't know that Palmerio fits the bill (well, maybe after the substance abuse bust, but that is more infamous that famous.)
During his career, how many times has a pitcher though "oh crap, here come Raffy"? How many times has batter thought, "I better not hit it over there, he's a vacuum"?
If it came down to Palmerio and Pedro Martínez, and there was only one spot left, I would give it to Pedro. Absolutely no contest. You need to be dominating at least at some point during your career to make the Hall.
The numbers should warrant a player getting in. Not how well-known his name is. Raffy certainly has the numbers to be a hall of famer, whether or not he's a household name like Ken Griffey Jr. or Barry Bonds.
i dont think a player needs to be "famous", but he should be dominant. the HOF voters determine it how they want, but if you ask me i think the HOF should be for those players that were dominant/special at their respective positions in their respective time periods.
Iconoclastic wrote:I say only players on the elite plane of dominance and fame such as Willie Mays, Babe Ruth, Bonds, Aaron, etc should be in the Hall. I don't remember it called the Hall of Consistency