The west coast of Ireland is stunning and it's shown off wonderfully well in "Banshees of Inisherin." The "troubles" of the film's protagonists and the brutal fallout it causes are as exasperating and insane as is the bigger picture backdrop. And I loved it. But "Rufus Alert" mentions it "warmed my heart." Not mine. Amputated fingers, arson and a dead donkey made it a wee bit less than heartwarming.
I just finished a book Ritter Collett wrote called “Men of the Machine”. It came out in mid-1977. Great little book that had a very funny prank Nuxy pulled on a former teammate during the season Nuxy spent with the Kansas City A’s. I’ll write it in the comments tomorrow. I miss Ol Ritt, Si Burick, and Hal McCoy in their heydays. Si Burick was the first sportswriter I really read. Heck I leaned to read a lot better by reading his column, with my Dad’s help!
Controversy for the sake of controversy is NOT my thing, so....I ageee with you Doc: There is room for Rolen and no room for any of the PED users. Oh yeah, and Peter Edward Rose was (is) a Hall of Fame Baseball Player no matter that he is NOT a hall of fame person. Could say more, but will limit my Irish self to agreeing "we" Irish can write, tell a story. Definitely an Irish thing my fine Irish friend. Slainte! Or simply, Happy New Year!
Excepting the backflip, Omar Vizquel could do more things than Ozzie Smith. He had 400+ more hits, his BA was .10 higher and he had 150+ more RBI. Smith had 175+ more SBs. But Visquel had over 400 of them himself. I believe that even if you acknowledge that Ozzie Smith was in a class of his own with the glove, Visquel's Defense was also generational, if not quite as spectacular.
Also - I love Scot Rolen just as I loved Buddy Bell. But I can't imagine voting for Rolen if you didn't vote for Bell. I agree wholeheartedly with your opinion that Post-season play should not carry much weight in a voter's HOF decision. Buddy Bell is a perfect example of why that gives short shrift to those who never got that chance.
All good points. Don't bother making Buddy's case to Doc, I've tried...and was summarily dismissed. I think that experience proved to me that it's silly to complain about the subjectiveness of many fellow HOF voters if you're a voter who can be ridiculously subjective, too. Buddy deserves much more consideration and has always been as borderline as Rolen, as you pointed out with such eruditeness. HIs longevity and his numbers have always been very impressive.
Concepcion's exclusion from a number of All Star games was probably due to Ozzie's backflip, more than anything. The backflip was one of baseball's most entertaining quirks of the period, if not all time, and won Ozzie quite a few votes he didn't deserve.
I wonder if there has even been a study on the percentage of players in the HOF who have post season experience. I'm guessing about 80%, which would be an unfortunate proof of bias.
What a X-mas gift, I just learned the TML was back a few weeks ago. Curious Doc, or maybe a column for another day, what about HOF case for Votto? Seems a little short on stats but is truly one of the great hitters of this time. How would you approach his vote assuming another decent year or two?
On Tua, I honestly can’t believe he’s still playing. Seeing his hands shake against the Bengals truly frightened me.
When he interacts with a gambler, regardless of who he is betting on, he’s subjecting himself to blackmail. Second, most bets are hardly ever just “for” or “against” your team. A spread is involved. If your main goal is beating the spread, that’s arguably in conflict with the goal of winning the game. And if you are betting on more than one game, your bet could influence game, decisions, use of personnel, etc. Do you want to create an exception for bets only on the team for which you are playing or managing, no spreads? Fine, but it defies reality. The only thing that makes sense is a ban on all betting.
Surprised no mention of the Crime Dog. Must be the post Christmas doldrums we all experience. Him goin in vastly improves JVotto's chances. Votto has 81% as many ABs as the Dog. This is mostly due to the vast number of JV walks. Except for HRs and RBIs, where JV has only 70% as many as Freddie, Joey leads the Super Sleuth Canine in all categories. Sure, HRs are glamorous, even to HOF voters, but JV's ungodly OBP numbers and slugging percentage are gonna play well to the persnickety ones allowed to cast the yay and nays. One more good year and he's probably a lock. You heard it here first.
"The Banshees etc etc" was just OK. Sure, Farrell and Gleason are strong actors, among the best. But the pace and overdone theme grew dreary for me after a while. I wanted to lend Farrell a little moped or at least a bike, he was walking so much. I felt like I spent half the movie staring at his back as they shot him from behind, walking all over creation. Yawn. "Rowin' " was never more boring. I threw 4 Rotten Tomatoes at it and felt much better.
Rolen has numbers and leadership qualities that deserve true HOF consideration. He is the ultimate borderline guy, like McGriff. I say let him in. He's the epitome of a real life baseball warrior. Good enough for me.
Adding to the movie recommendations, I offer “The French Dispatch (of the Liberty, Kansas Evening Sun).” I am not an eager Wes Anderson acolyte. And while this most recent entry of his contains plenty of self-congratulatory, rigid Wes-isms, it also features top notch writing and filmmaking. I could handle it in one sitting. Just too much too much. But it’s also a film I haven’t stopped looking back at in the week since seeing it. Each time I sensed it was taking itself too seriously, some bit of dialogue or preposterous narrative turn junked my presumption. It’s not a film I see myself re-viewing in its entirety, but I absolutely want to dissect each vignette over and over.
My baseball fan friends (and they seem to be dwindling every year) and I have this discussion/argument all the time. I think the HoF should be more difficult to get into. As much as I love Scott Rolen, he was not Mike Schmidt, yet we would be judging them so. The Hall now is so diluted with "very good" that the true elites are underrated. Keep the current system, but add an "Immortals" section in the Hall. Those who get 90% of the vote, or maybe, a panel of former players/writers, etc to determine the candidates. Also, I think there should be an Mount Rushmore-esque "All-Time 9" recognized in the Hall. The single greatest position player as determined by vote or the panel, including starting pitcher. This could change over the years as newer players come along - Trout, Ohteni, Junior, etc - with a nomination and a head-to-head vote. Just something to elevate the legendary greats from "average" super stars ...
A few conflicting thoughts barside at ye' ole TML. The Baseball HOF does not account for a man's character during the time he played and that's a constant rub**. Nor should it come into play to compare society's morals today vs. yesteryear.
Brant, I believe the All-Time 9 would unintentionally exclude Peter Edward Rose as he played >500 games at five positions: 1B (Lou Gehrig), 2B (Rogers Hornesby), 3B (Mike Schmidt 10 GGs!!!), LF (Ted Williams), and RF (Hank Aaron/Babe Ruth). However, he was more than a capable player earning Rookie of the Year, one Gold Glove, and one MVP. IMHO Pete does deserve to be in that All-Time 9 conversation.
** Paul: 1) red meat has never been illegal in sports or society and nobody pretended red meat was a problem that really should have been managed/tested. 2) set aside all the years of PER's denials along with his continual poking MLB by signing autographs in Cooperstown & various casinos. I often wonder if Pete's trials in the media excludes some evidence MLB gathered illegally. If so, it would/could be even more embarrassing to MLB for them not figuring out what was really going on earlier. And if that extra evidence was not permissible legally, he'd surely need to remain on the permanently banned list. Soooo, essentially MLB were prosecution, jury, and "executioner".
The west coast of Ireland is stunning and it's shown off wonderfully well in "Banshees of Inisherin." The "troubles" of the film's protagonists and the brutal fallout it causes are as exasperating and insane as is the bigger picture backdrop. And I loved it. But "Rufus Alert" mentions it "warmed my heart." Not mine. Amputated fingers, arson and a dead donkey made it a wee bit less than heartwarming.
P.S. Agreed on Rolen.
"We all know what great writers the Irish are."...loved it.
.
"Crazy fools, the Irish." --Band of Brothers (Scott Grimes as Sgt. Don Malarkey)
Luv ya, Doc...
I just finished a book Ritter Collett wrote called “Men of the Machine”. It came out in mid-1977. Great little book that had a very funny prank Nuxy pulled on a former teammate during the season Nuxy spent with the Kansas City A’s. I’ll write it in the comments tomorrow. I miss Ol Ritt, Si Burick, and Hal McCoy in their heydays. Si Burick was the first sportswriter I really read. Heck I leaned to read a lot better by reading his column, with my Dad’s help!
Post season games should definitely count toward Hall of Fame balloting.
Regards,
Eli Manning
Controversy for the sake of controversy is NOT my thing, so....I ageee with you Doc: There is room for Rolen and no room for any of the PED users. Oh yeah, and Peter Edward Rose was (is) a Hall of Fame Baseball Player no matter that he is NOT a hall of fame person. Could say more, but will limit my Irish self to agreeing "we" Irish can write, tell a story. Definitely an Irish thing my fine Irish friend. Slainte! Or simply, Happy New Year!
Doc, if you liked The Bourbon King check out Cornbread Mafia if you haven’t already. All about the illegal pot business in Kentucky.
Nobody here saying anything about Dave Concepcion..he should have been in the HOF a long time ago.
Excepting the backflip, Omar Vizquel could do more things than Ozzie Smith. He had 400+ more hits, his BA was .10 higher and he had 150+ more RBI. Smith had 175+ more SBs. But Visquel had over 400 of them himself. I believe that even if you acknowledge that Ozzie Smith was in a class of his own with the glove, Visquel's Defense was also generational, if not quite as spectacular.
Also - I love Scot Rolen just as I loved Buddy Bell. But I can't imagine voting for Rolen if you didn't vote for Bell. I agree wholeheartedly with your opinion that Post-season play should not carry much weight in a voter's HOF decision. Buddy Bell is a perfect example of why that gives short shrift to those who never got that chance.
All good points. Don't bother making Buddy's case to Doc, I've tried...and was summarily dismissed. I think that experience proved to me that it's silly to complain about the subjectiveness of many fellow HOF voters if you're a voter who can be ridiculously subjective, too. Buddy deserves much more consideration and has always been as borderline as Rolen, as you pointed out with such eruditeness. HIs longevity and his numbers have always been very impressive.
Concepcion's exclusion from a number of All Star games was probably due to Ozzie's backflip, more than anything. The backflip was one of baseball's most entertaining quirks of the period, if not all time, and won Ozzie quite a few votes he didn't deserve.
I wonder if there has even been a study on the percentage of players in the HOF who have post season experience. I'm guessing about 80%, which would be an unfortunate proof of bias.
No one will ever change my mind that if B. Bell had played for Baltimore or Oakland from '72-85, rather than Cleveland, he'd be in the HOF today.
What a X-mas gift, I just learned the TML was back a few weeks ago. Curious Doc, or maybe a column for another day, what about HOF case for Votto? Seems a little short on stats but is truly one of the great hitters of this time. How would you approach his vote assuming another decent year or two?
On Tua, I honestly can’t believe he’s still playing. Seeing his hands shake against the Bengals truly frightened me.
Votto's case remains open. Assuming a couple decent years is assuming much. He might not be ready by Opening Day.
When he interacts with a gambler, regardless of who he is betting on, he’s subjecting himself to blackmail. Second, most bets are hardly ever just “for” or “against” your team. A spread is involved. If your main goal is beating the spread, that’s arguably in conflict with the goal of winning the game. And if you are betting on more than one game, your bet could influence game, decisions, use of personnel, etc. Do you want to create an exception for bets only on the team for which you are playing or managing, no spreads? Fine, but it defies reality. The only thing that makes sense is a ban on all betting.
Surprised no mention of the Crime Dog. Must be the post Christmas doldrums we all experience. Him goin in vastly improves JVotto's chances. Votto has 81% as many ABs as the Dog. This is mostly due to the vast number of JV walks. Except for HRs and RBIs, where JV has only 70% as many as Freddie, Joey leads the Super Sleuth Canine in all categories. Sure, HRs are glamorous, even to HOF voters, but JV's ungodly OBP numbers and slugging percentage are gonna play well to the persnickety ones allowed to cast the yay and nays. One more good year and he's probably a lock. You heard it here first.
"The Banshees etc etc" was just OK. Sure, Farrell and Gleason are strong actors, among the best. But the pace and overdone theme grew dreary for me after a while. I wanted to lend Farrell a little moped or at least a bike, he was walking so much. I felt like I spent half the movie staring at his back as they shot him from behind, walking all over creation. Yawn. "Rowin' " was never more boring. I threw 4 Rotten Tomatoes at it and felt much better.
Rolen has numbers and leadership qualities that deserve true HOF consideration. He is the ultimate borderline guy, like McGriff. I say let him in. He's the epitome of a real life baseball warrior. Good enough for me.
Votto's chances improve every time an OG voter loses his vote.
True dat. He's a darling of the analytics crowd.
Adding to the movie recommendations, I offer “The French Dispatch (of the Liberty, Kansas Evening Sun).” I am not an eager Wes Anderson acolyte. And while this most recent entry of his contains plenty of self-congratulatory, rigid Wes-isms, it also features top notch writing and filmmaking. I could handle it in one sitting. Just too much too much. But it’s also a film I haven’t stopped looking back at in the week since seeing it. Each time I sensed it was taking itself too seriously, some bit of dialogue or preposterous narrative turn junked my presumption. It’s not a film I see myself re-viewing in its entirety, but I absolutely want to dissect each vignette over and over.
Hall and Oates were very good. Tia should never play again and someone should be responsible if something bad happens. Happy New Year!
My baseball fan friends (and they seem to be dwindling every year) and I have this discussion/argument all the time. I think the HoF should be more difficult to get into. As much as I love Scott Rolen, he was not Mike Schmidt, yet we would be judging them so. The Hall now is so diluted with "very good" that the true elites are underrated. Keep the current system, but add an "Immortals" section in the Hall. Those who get 90% of the vote, or maybe, a panel of former players/writers, etc to determine the candidates. Also, I think there should be an Mount Rushmore-esque "All-Time 9" recognized in the Hall. The single greatest position player as determined by vote or the panel, including starting pitcher. This could change over the years as newer players come along - Trout, Ohteni, Junior, etc - with a nomination and a head-to-head vote. Just something to elevate the legendary greats from "average" super stars ...
Diluted is a fair word here. Part of why I shake my head at those who vote for 10 candidates.
A few conflicting thoughts barside at ye' ole TML. The Baseball HOF does not account for a man's character during the time he played and that's a constant rub**. Nor should it come into play to compare society's morals today vs. yesteryear.
Brant, I believe the All-Time 9 would unintentionally exclude Peter Edward Rose as he played >500 games at five positions: 1B (Lou Gehrig), 2B (Rogers Hornesby), 3B (Mike Schmidt 10 GGs!!!), LF (Ted Williams), and RF (Hank Aaron/Babe Ruth). However, he was more than a capable player earning Rookie of the Year, one Gold Glove, and one MVP. IMHO Pete does deserve to be in that All-Time 9 conversation.
** Paul: 1) red meat has never been illegal in sports or society and nobody pretended red meat was a problem that really should have been managed/tested. 2) set aside all the years of PER's denials along with his continual poking MLB by signing autographs in Cooperstown & various casinos. I often wonder if Pete's trials in the media excludes some evidence MLB gathered illegally. If so, it would/could be even more embarrassing to MLB for them not figuring out what was really going on earlier. And if that extra evidence was not permissible legally, he'd surely need to remain on the permanently banned list. Soooo, essentially MLB were prosecution, jury, and "executioner".
Maybe it could be All-Time 10 and include a DH. Pete as DH?
I think we all agree on Catcher :-)