Yoda wrote:Yes it was a team effort and thank you for pointing that out. Schilling didn't score any runs for his team the last time I checked. Whether Schilling was good or bad, he is probably still a HOFer in my view (as much as I hate him). What he did in the playoffs doesn't make him a better pitcher. He just happened to be at the right place at the right time.
No, but it's not the Hall of the Best of the Generation. At a certain level, I think the Hall exists to memoralize players who were iconic for the time that they played. And that's why players who accumulate stats just by virtue of longevity are less regarded than others who had brilliant, but shorter, careers.
And one of the things that make players iconic is how they perform (or never show up) in the post-season. Can you hear the name Kirk Gibson and not think about him limping around the bases after hitting the home run? People become obsessed about who "deserves" to be in the Hall rather than who "belongs" there. After all, it is more than anything a museum to baseball.
Last edited by Matthias on Tue Mar 24, 2009 1:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Yoda wrote:Fair points but I simply don't believe that a dozen post season games should be the focus when a guy has a great career.
I wouldn't make it the focus, either, but it is fair to make one of the considerations.
And if you don't reach a certain level of performance in your career, I don't think you ever get to the discussion of someone's post-season games. I.e. I don't care how many post-season HRs Aaron Boone hits, he's never receiving a vote.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Yoda wrote:Yes it was a team effort and thank you for pointing that out. Schilling didn't score any runs for his team the last time I checked. Whether Schilling was good or bad, he is probably still a HOFer in my view (as much as I hate him). What he did in the playoffs doesn't make him a better pitcher. He just happened to be at the right place at the right time.
No, but it's not the Hall of the Best of the Generation. At a certain level, I think the Hall exists to memoralize players who were iconic for the time that they played. And that's why players who accumulate stats just by virtue of longevity are less regarded than others who had brilliant, but shorter, careers.
The problem with that is, while it sounds great, it almost never happens in practice. The Hall has historically rewarded long careers of stat accumulation over shorter, more spectacular bursts. There will always be exceptions, but the rule is typically start with the big counting numbers (3000, 300, 500) and then work your way down.
And one of the things that make players iconic is how they perform (or never show up) in the post-season. Can you hear the name Kirk Gibson and not think about him limping around the bases after hitting the home run? People become obsessed about who "deserves" to be in the Hall rather than who "belongs" there. After all, it is more than anything a museum to baseball.
Iconic moments are part of the Hall's museum even if the player doesn't get inducted. Gibson will be part of the Hall's exhibition even though his plaque will never be on the wall. Schilling's ketchup stained sock will be there too, but to get the plaque it is a question of whether he "deserves" it or not. The plaque is about immortalizing the game's greatest players.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Matthias » Tue Mar 24, 2009 1:14 pm 
