2012/2013 MLB Offseason Thread

[Ananas]

The sad thing is how the Braves really don't seem to understand why there's anything wrong with this.

[Your Mom]

Wow. Thats even worse than the old ones

[thatshortguy]

The sad thing is how the Braves really don't seem to understand why there's anything wrong with this.

The biggest point in that article is that nobody has been calling for that logo to return. They're trying to cash in on a nostaglia that is not only nonexistant, but offensive.

[gunnar hendershow]

And just when we finally rid ourselves of Chief Wahoo.

[Ananas]

The BBWAA voted no one into the Hall of Fame this year. Safe to say enough "protest" blank ballots from brave writers who want to make themselves the story. Seriously, fuck off. It's so incredibly petty to not only decline to vote for someone you don't think deserving, but also submit a ballot to punish everyone. They want to punish Bonds and Clemens because they're all pious and they're willing to overlook the fact that they're two of the greatest baseball players of all time. So Piazza and Bagwell are not Hall of Famers basically because they're muscular? Ugh.

[Your Mom]

I don't like what happened during that era but I think it's ridiculous that these players didnt make it. I dont think you can retroactively punish everyone for something that was rampant throughout the whole game.

[gunnar hendershow]

I wasn't expecting a real consensus this year since I knew people like Clemens and Bonds weren't going to get the 95% each would get without our knowledge of steroids. So this doesn't surprise me.

[Panni]

What's supposed to be about baseball history has become a group of old men deciding what is morally acceptable for baseball fans.

We can decide for ourselves how to rank Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens & Mike Pizza. These writers are obsessed with the power they have in their hands.

[Lowerdeck]

I can understand Bonds/Sosa/McGwire/Raffi/Clemens not getting in.

But Biggio/Bagwell/Piazza? They never been implicated for anything.

[gunnar hendershow]

Biggio getting 68% wouldn't have looked bad had Clemens/Bonds finished ahead of him, the thing is he (as well as Piazza, Morris, Bagwell, Raines, and Smith) didn't gain votes from the people not voting for the steroid guys since some didn't submit ballots with anyone's names, some did vote for the steroid players and then as a result couldn't vote for all the players who wound up making the top 7. There surely are voters who don't think some of those players, especially Morris, are Hall worthy. And then there are always your voters who won't vote for players on their first few ballots.

The whole system is a mess. But I don't think there was really an all-out collective conspiracy against Biggio, etc. The names directly linked to steroids do have people deliberately not voting for them on morals. And while voters have accepted relief pitchers, especially closers, as being Hall-worthy there still is a large segment of voters who don't think DH is a position proper and thus won't vote for the position's best (Edgar Martinez).

[Your Mom]

I'm honestly not so sure about DH either.

[Lint]

Neither am I...but then again, I'm a fan of an NL team and don't like the DH rule in general

[GhostMachine]

I'm an NL guy, and I have heard talk about adding the DH to the NL. I say fuck you to every single human being who wants that.

The problem with the DH is that when it was added to the AL, it was intended to prolong the careers who could still hit but couldn't field anymore due to age or injury. Not to give jobs to motherfuckers who can't do anything but hit in the first place. I don't think anyone who is a career DH should ever be in the Hall of Fame.

As for the Hall of Fame, Bagwell, Biggio and Piazza all deserve to be in. And I can't believe Curt Schilling didn't get more votes.

Next year Greg Maddux will be eligible. If he doesn't get in, they need to re-do how voting is done!

[The Buscher]

The Mets are considering inducting Piazza into the team HOF this year. He's chronologically the next guy that should go in (John Franco was inducted last year) and after that there probably won't be any more inductions until after Wright, Reyes, and the like have retired.

I really hope they decide to retire his #31 officially this season as well. They haven't issued the number since he left the team anyway. But from what I've read, the Mets do not want to retire any uniformed player numbers unless they are enshrined in Cooperstown in a Mets cap - hence why Seaver's the only player to have his number retired by the Mets. If Piazza got enshrined as a Dodger they might not retire his number at all and just leave it in unofficial retirement like Gary Carter's #8. Normally I can appreciate trying to have somewhat strict number retirement rules...but since the Mets have a relatively shit history it kinda sucks to realize that Piazza is probably the only Met that could potentially have his number retired within the next couple of decades.

[gunnar hendershow]

I'm an NL guy, and I have heard talk about adding the DH to the NL. I say fuck you to every single human being who wants that.

The problem with the DH is that when it was added to the AL, it was intended to prolong the careers who could still hit but couldn't field anymore due to age or injury. Not to give jobs to motherfuckers who can't do anything but hit in the first place. I don't think anyone who is a career DH should ever be in the Hall of Fame.

As for the Hall of Fame, Bagwell, Biggio and Piazza all deserve to be in. And I can't believe Curt Schilling didn't get more votes.

Next year Greg Maddux will be eligible. If he doesn't get in, they need to re-do how voting is done!

Maddux will absolutely get in on the first ballot. He's the most dominant pitcher of his era.

The thing with DH is, like relief pitching, it's a modern evolution of the game. DH, since its inception, has morphed into something that is in many cases specialized. Relief pitching in the last 25 years has also become something incredibly specialized. If DH can so adamantly be referred to as a position that exists for people who can't field, then closer might as well be adamantly referred to as a position that exists for people who can't start. It's way too much of a value judgment to make about DH otherwise, especially when there are some great hitters in the Hall of Fame who were terrible fielders. 1B was the DH of its day.

[The Buscher]

Maddux will get in first ballot. He'll probably get like 92% of the vote or something. There will always be a few assholes who intentionally don't vote for him under the guise of "well, he's obviously going to get over 75% of the vote...but if Babe Ruth doesn't get 100% of the vote, nobody should!"

[GhostMachine]

The problem with HoF voting is that members of the BBWA get to vote long after they shouldn't. Some have even admitted they don't even follow the sport anymore.

I think the cut off should be 10 years after you retire or switch to covering a different sport. After that, either kick them out or make them take a test every few proving they still know what's going on with baseball in order to be able to vote.

[Toe]

I like the DH, and I like how it makes the leagues different.

I think Biggio will get in. 3000 hits is 3000 hits.

Edited January 13, 2013 by Toe

[GhostMachine]

I'm an NL guy, and I have heard talk about adding the DH to the NL. I say fuck you to every single human being who wants that.

The problem with the DH is that when it was added to the AL, it was intended to prolong the careers who could still hit but couldn't field anymore due to age or injury. Not to give jobs to motherfuckers who can't do anything but hit in the first place. I don't think anyone who is a career DH should ever be in the Hall of Fame.

As for the Hall of Fame, Bagwell, Biggio and Piazza all deserve to be in. And I can't believe Curt Schilling didn't get more votes.

Next year Greg Maddux will be eligible. If he doesn't get in, they need to re-do how voting is done!

Maddux will absolutely get in on the first ballot. He's the most dominant pitcher of his era.

The thing with DH is, like relief pitching, it's a modern evolution of the game. DH, since its inception, has morphed into something that is in many cases specialized. Relief pitching in the last 25 years has also become something incredibly specialized. If DH can so adamantly be referred to as a position that exists for people who can't field, then closer might as well be adamantly referred to as a position that exists for people who can't start. It's way too much of a value judgment to make about DH otherwise, especially when there are some great hitters in the Hall of Fame who were terrible fielders. 1B was the DH of its day.

My take on it is this:

Having Relievers and closers in baseball makes sense. Back in the old days when pitchers were expected to pitch the entire game....including extra innings....I'm sure a lot of those pitchers had shortened careers by wearing their arms out or being unable to deal with the stress (both mental AND physical) of doing so on a regular basis. On the other hand, the sport would be just fine without the DH.

There's a big difference between being a fielder, who is in a game a huge chunk of time (if not the whole game) and a DH who only comes up to bat 3 to 5 times in an average game. If you let them in, you might as well look and let some NL players who pinch hit more than they play position in, too.

The Pro Football Hall of Fame is biased against Kickers, and so are a lot of players. Without Kickers, Pro Football would be a lot different (and would probably need to be called something else) and maybe even boring. Without DHs, Pro Baseball would be....the National League. Kickers belong in the Pro Football Hall of Fame before DHs belong in Cooperstown.

And I'm not saying I'm against the DH position. Like Toe said, it makes the leagues different. But I want it to stay like it is.....AL only. And I don't like how its evolved from being a career extending position to being a `this guy can't field worth crap, but he can hit like a freak, so lets sign him up' type deal. (Oh, I understand it, but I don't like it at all)

Edited January 13, 2013 by GhostMachine

[gunnar hendershow]

I'm an NL guy, and I have heard talk about adding the DH to the NL. I say fuck you to every single human being who wants that.

The problem with the DH is that when it was added to the AL, it was intended to prolong the careers who could still hit but couldn't field anymore due to age or injury. Not to give jobs to motherfuckers who can't do anything but hit in the first place. I don't think anyone who is a career DH should ever be in the Hall of Fame.

As for the Hall of Fame, Bagwell, Biggio and Piazza all deserve to be in. And I can't believe Curt Schilling didn't get more votes.

Next year Greg Maddux will be eligible. If he doesn't get in, they need to re-do how voting is done!

Maddux will absolutely get in on the first ballot. He's the most dominant pitcher of his era.

The thing with DH is, like relief pitching, it's a modern evolution of the game. DH, since its inception, has morphed into something that is in many cases specialized. Relief pitching in the last 25 years has also become something incredibly specialized. If DH can so adamantly be referred to as a position that exists for people who can't field, then closer might as well be adamantly referred to as a position that exists for people who can't start. It's way too much of a value judgment to make about DH otherwise, especially when there are some great hitters in the Hall of Fame who were terrible fielders. 1B was the DH of its day.

My take on it is this:

Having Relievers and closers in baseball makes sense. Back in the old days when pitchers were expected to pitch the entire game....including extra innings....I'm sure a lot of those pitchers had shortened careers by wearing their arms out or being unable to deal with the stress (both mental AND physical) of doing so on a regular basis. On the other hand, the sport would be just fine without the DH.

There's a big difference between being a fielder, who is in a game a huge chunk of time (if not the whole game) and a DH who only comes up to bat 3 to 5 times in an average game. If you let them in, you might as well look and let some NL players who pinch hit more than they play position in, too.

The Pro Football Hall of Fame is biased against Kickers, and so are a lot of players. Without Kickers, Pro Football would be a lot different (and would probably need to be called something else) and maybe even boring. Without DHs, Pro Baseball would be....the National League. Kickers belong in the Pro Football Hall of Fame before DHs belong in Cooperstown.

And I'm not saying I'm against the DH position. Like Toe said, it makes the leagues different. But I want it to stay like it is.....AL only. And I don't like how its evolved from being a career extending position to being a `this guy can't field worth crap, but he can hit like a freak, so lets sign him up' type deal. (Oh, I understand it, but I don't like it at all)

But, again, in the olden days players who could hit like freaks were put at 1B more often than not. Basically, if you're a good enough hitter as a DH to be considered a Hall of Fame worthy player then in the NL or 1960s and earlier you very likely would have played 1B. Do we penalize someone who is a great hitter but horrible fielder in Hall voting? No. And it's also a reach to argue that DH's all can't field. In some cases you have a team with 2 1B or 4 OF, you'll want to put all those bats in the lineup so you put them at DH even though they would be perfectly competent at LF for example. It's lost that Edgar Martinez played over 3 full seasons at 3B (and some various games at 1B) and while his career fielding percentage at 3B was far from elite, it still leaves him well above the very bottom. His move to full-time DH was more fueled by Piniella having enough players for the infield, and it worked out well that for quite a few years when he could have, and on occasion did, play in the field he was primarily a DH. The argument that they can't field is flawed since in some cases they can field, and due to this diversity the judgment has to be made on some other factors. This requires us to look more at the individual players at DH in the voting for the Hall than the position as a whole.

tl;dr: Without concrete evidence a player was so bad in the field they would have only had a major league career thanks to the DH you can't judge the player based on their lack of fielding numbers you have to judge them based on what's there.

It's from this idea that I personally feel DH should be treated as its own position. Since it is typically mere speculation someone could or couldn't field, their Hall of Fame numbers should largely be judged on the numbers they produced when compared to other people who were career DH's. This is how we treat relief pitching, a specialized role, and how it would make sense to threat DH.