GIL-Watch!

[Guest d'Kong76]

Anyone know when the announcement is?

[G-Fafif]

2 PM EST, sources say.

[Guest d'Kong76]

2pm according to GHBItBHoF fb page. The internet will
explode if no #14in14.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Scooped again!

[seawolf17]

d'Kong76 wrote: Scooped again!

Go ahead. Try to get an internet fastball past Greg. It's impossible.

[Zvon]

We'll get word in about 5 minutes. Good luck to Gil.

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Meanwhile, if Mike Piazza falls one vote short next month, here's your man.

Lynn Henning of the Detroit News is boycotting this year because he's angry that he can't vote for more than 10 players.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/columnists/lynn-henning/2014/12/08/henning-player-limit-justifies-boycott-hall-vote/20094565/

I realize his vote won't play into the percentages unless he turns in blank ballot. But he's screwing the mid-level guys he proclaims to be helping. Randy Johnson and Pedro are gonna get in regardless.

This also is why there will never be a unanimous player. There's always somebody out there looking to [crossout]draw attention to himself[/crossout] make a statement.

Edited December 8, 2014 by Guest

[Guest sharpie]

No one gets in.

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

BOOOOOOOOOOO.

No one elected, Gil gets three or fewer votes -- fewer than Maury Wills.

[Guest sharpie]

Tony Oliva and Dick Allen were close.

[Edgy MD]

The abstaining writers is a meaningful issue, but probably better in the other, main-ballot thread.

[Zvon]

BOOOOOOO!

Very disappointing

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Edgy MD wrote: The abstaining writers is a meaningful issue, but probably better in the other, main-ballot thread.

I moved it to the other thread.

[stevejrogers]

Since Hodges was one of the ones with 3 or fewer, I seriously wonder how much that intense FB group had to do with Hodges getting so few votes.

Considering how much the panels are trying to get away from the cronyism and campaigning that have hurt the VC's reputation in the past.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Well, that was anti-climatic!

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Real shame about Dick Allen, too; his odds aren't exactly going up with time. And that prime, ma-RON.

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Now there are reporters suggesting that Gil, in particular should no longer be on a ballot because he's been on so many ballots and has not been inducted.

The Hall has a problem here. Clearly there are issues with the voting when you have years where no deserving candidate is inducted -- or, in the case of Ron Santo or even Leo Durocher, deserving candidates are passed over year after year until the year they die, and they suddenly are worthy.

On one hand, the reporter has a point. These same players have been looked at time and time again. If the Hall isn't going to vote in candidates, then declare the era adequately represented and don't go through this charade again.

[Guest d'Kong76]

I think this was their last shot, time to move on.

[Edgy MD]

I have no problem with players be looked at again and again. The frequency is going to change, as more worthy veterans will appear and more will be uncovered. But it's the nature of history that we return to subjects periodically and review and perhaps revise the record.

[Guest d'Kong76]

The mission is cooked, I'd be surprised if he's even to
be considered again.

[Edgy MD]

Check out Gil Jr. looking exactly like you'd think the 60-something man his father never got to be would've looked like.

[stevejrogers]

d'Kong76 wrote: The mission is cooked, I'd be surprised if he's even to be considered again.

Or in the manner of Deacon White was two years ago by the Pre-Integration Era Committee.

A catcher/3Bman who last played in 1890, and died in 1939.

[Chad ochoseis]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Real shame about Dick Allen, too; his odds aren't exactly going up with time. And that prime, ma-RON.

This. You can make a case that Gil was really good, but not quite good enough. You can't make it in a room full of Mets fans, but you can make it.

There is no case against Dick Allen. 53rd best OPS in history and led his league four times in his career. 19th best OPS+ ever. Lousy fielder, but he wouldn't be the first good-hit, no-field corner infielder in the HOF. The only argument against him was that he was supposed to be an ass, though I don't doubt there was a good bit of racism behind that label. Put the man in already.

[seawolf17]

Chad Ochoseis wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Real shame about Dick Allen, too; his odds aren't exactly going up with time. And that prime, ma-RON. This. You can make a case that Gil was really good, but not quite good enough. You can't make it in a room full of Mets fans, but you can make it. There is no case against Dick Allen. 53rd best OPS in history and led his league four times in his career. 19th best OPS+ ever. Lousy fielder, but he wouldn't be the first good-hit, no-field corner infielder in the HOF. The only argument against him was that he was supposed to be an ass, though I don't doubt there was a good bit of racism behind that label. Put the man in already.

This, I think. It's hard for New Yorkers to take the emotion out of the Gil debate, but I just don't think it's going to happen.

[Edgy MD]

Oh, I think there's no end to the number of people --- black and white --- who would testify that Allen was a terrible teammate.

Bill James puts him only in the company of Rogers Hornsby as the most controversial teammates of all time. That's a pretty strong statement that I have to take issue with. I mean, Carl Everett? John Rocker? Reggie Jackson? Hal Chase was the Devil wearing a first baseman's mitt. But when Bill James nails that one up on the wall, I have to take notice.

It's not the last word on him, but if there's serious testimony that he hurt his teams --- and there is --- that has to be considered when weighing the evidence.

[seawolf17]

There are a lot of dbags in the Hall. Dick Allen wouldn't be the first. But when you look at the b-r similarity scores, for example, his closest comparisons are guys like Willie Mays and Duke Snider as a young player (and David Wright, interestingly), and as he gets older, it's Chipper/Sheffield/Stargell. He's a better case than Gil, in my mind.

[Edgy MD]

seawolf17 wrote: There are a lot of dbags in the Hall.

Sure, including some of those cited (Hornsby, Jackson) but it's not a black-and-white thing. The notion is that he was particularly exceeding and destructive. I don't think it's doing the job to just say, "There are plenty of douchebags in the Hall, therefore we won't factor in his record as one."

[Edgy MD]

i was looking for that Bill James comment and I instead found this great article by Dave Fleming, who looks at it both ways. I must've read it before because he also calls Hal Chase the Devil.

Veterans Committee Members

Players

Jim Bunning
Rod Carew
Ferguson Jenkins
Al Kaline
Joe Morgan
Ozzie Smith
Don Sutton



Executives


Jim Frey
Pat Gillick
David Glass
Roland Hemond
Bob Watson




Media


Steve Hirdt
Dick Kaegel
Phil Pepe
Tracy Ringolsby

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Ringo. There you go. Morgan, too, seems like kind of a goofball. I would love to know who they voted for -- if they supported any candidates at all.

[G-Fafif]

By my calculations, this marked the 35th different election, conducted under various auspices, in which the Hall of Fame rejected Gil Hodges. Being a Dodger and Mets legend might just have to do.