[toploader1976]

The voting needs to go away. Someone is on the ballot for 8 years, why voted in now and not 7 years ago?

Simple - create a list of accomplishments
500 HR
.300 lifetime average
300 Wins

Whatever categories and #s you want, but if a player reaches 2 or more - automatic induction.

Leave the fringe players to a panel each year (Sheffield, Schilling, A. Jones, etc.). Now it's whoever has the most retweets somehow gains traction. 356 home runs 7 years is 356 home runs today. It has become a political popularity contest and it's ruined what should the ultimate award of a player's career. Hey I'm in the Hall of Fame, well so is Harold Baines.

[jplarson]

If I could get over Griffey not being unanimous

Hey I'm in the Hall of Fame, well so is Harold Baines.

These two things are what turned me off from caring about the HoF, though the Baines is more egregious. Think about all the other legendary guys who didn't get unanimous and it becomes more meh that Griffey and Jeter weren't unanimous.

Baines going in? That's beyond the pale.

[cjgiannini]

Those of you who don't think Larry Walker is deserving of the Hall of Fame are crazy. 5 time all-star, 7 gold gloves, career .300 hitter, 72.7 career WAR (higher than HOFers like Tony Gwynn, Willie McCovey, Mike Piazza, Duke Snider, Roberto Alomar, Vladimir Guerrero, and Harmon Killebrew) .965 OPS (11th highest among ALL HOFers!) and he stole 230 bases. He had great numbers for over a decade and if you hold his peak seasons being played at Coors against him, his career OPS+ (which adjusts for ballparks) is higher than HOFers Ernie Banks, some guy named Derek Jeter, Ken Griffey Jr., Carl Yastrzemski, Tony Gwynn, and is equal to Chipper Jones.

If Larry Walker played his career in New York he would have been elected years ago.

[toploader1976]

Walker's first year on the ballot was 2011, he was 10th in the voting with 118 votes (20.3%), 9 years later he's over 75%? Granted, everyone ahead of him has been elected since then so it could be that he just rose by default (by the way Baines was 18th that year and was removed for not getting 5%)? If he's HOF worthy now, why wasn't he then? Or it a case of writers feeling like they have to vote for someone? I think Walker was a great player, not elite; I would argue his merit as a HOFer, but would listen to reasons why he shouldn't be. It's just election by default and it's not based on performance, or maybe I'm bitter because Murphy isn't enshrined yet.

[jplarson]

Walker's first year on the ballot was 2011, he was 10th in the voting with 118 votes (20.3%), 9 years later he's over 75%? Granted, everyone ahead of him has been elected since then so it could be that he just rose by default (by the way Baines was 18th that year and was removed for not getting 5%)? If he's HOF worthy now, why wasn't he then? Or it a case of writers feeling like they have to vote for someone? I think Walker was a great player, not elite; I would argue his merit as a HOFer, but would listen to reasons why he shouldn't be. It's just election by default and it's not based on performance, or maybe I'm bitter because Murphy isn't enshrined yet.

Remember Baines didn't go in the traditional method. He was elected by a committee stacked with people who played with, managed, or someway associated with him.

[rad_1205]

This post has absolutely nothing to do with Jeter or Larry Walker. Both were great players and very deserving. However this keep Bonds and Clemens our is getting ridiculous. We either need better writers to vote or give the votes to people who actually played the sport. Steroids or not they screwed up allowing Pizza, Bagwell and many other to get in. This talk about David Ortiz being a 1st year Ballot HOFer, but Manny cant even get 40 percent of the votes. GTF out of here!

[garrisc]

Although I will be heading to Cooperstown in July for Jeter, I would rather be watching Murphy go in.


Scott

[zeprock]

I think if you make it in your first year of eligibility then you are a no-brainer and one of the elite and deserve the enshrinement. If it takes you up to five years to get inducted then you are Hall Worthy and just not the elite of the elite. If it takes more than five years then you are probably not a no-brainer and need consideration making you borderline and probably not deserving. If it takes a Veteran's Committee, then you wouldn't be in if not for your buddies. These days it seems like most anyone can get in if they had a good World Series or a couple of good seasons or played on a good team.

That being said, I think the voting process is flawed. Why is it the baseball writers get to decide? Perhaps it should be a panel of experts, writers, statisticians, players and maybe even to some extent, the public.

When you stand Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Harold Baines and Ted Simmons together and say they are all in the same class . . . I don't think so.

[toploader1976]

what Zeprock said

[jbissell]

Bonds and Clemens sweating it out doesnt really bother me at all. If they can find a way to celebrate their accomplishments before they started juicing, Im fine with that. Anything beyond that needs a massive asterisk placed next to it. Both will eventually get in I suspect. However, I will always have more respect for players like Baines and Simmons who played the game the right way, regardless if they're Hall of Fame worthy or not.

As for Piazza and Bagwell, Im not sure they were ever busted for anything. I could be wrong about that though.

Lastly, once the juicer Pandora's Box opens up, Id like to see renewed consideration for Pete Rose.