Official MLB Discussion Thread

[Remianen]

Originally Posted by The Final Countdown

I don't see any way Nomar is getting in the hall.

As for Jeter, he's an obvious lock, but I don't know or care whether he's a "first ballot" inductee. I find the whole "first ballot" thing to be contrived and stupid. You're either a Hall of Famer, or you're not. The whole point of the HOF is to recognize the best of the best, and I don't see the point of adding another layer of separation. It's not like a guy's numbers get any better in his 2nd year of eligibility.

That would be you. Tell me something, when you played pickup sports as a kid, who always got picked first? If it was you, there was prestige in that. You were considered a 'lock' to make the team capable of winning. You might think it's contrived but then so are draft picks, by that logic.

A first ballot Hall of Famer is a 'slam dunk'. It's a 'duh' selection. It means that person's career was SO outstanding that, if they could, they'd lower the number of years the player had to be retired to be eligible. You gonna tell me there's no difference between Michael Jordan and James Worthy? Jordan = first ballot. Worthy = 3rd try. Was there a better case that could be made than Jordan being enshrined the first time he was eligible? It's no different from being the first overall pick in a draft. Sure, there are other people who get picked in the first round. But there's only ONE first overall pick. Likewise, years in which there are multiple first ballot enshrinees are considered extraordinary.

As for Nomar, he doesn't need a Hall of Fame nod. He married Mia Hamm.

BHK, I dunno if I'd call it a National League style team, especially considering how the Rays did a couple years ago with that exact same style. Knowing the game fairly well, I prefer to force pitchers to throw heat (knowing that if they go the junkballer route, it's not going to end well) which gives everyone better pitches to hit. Most pitchers aren't Randy Johnson (world class heat and control to match) so usually it works in your favor.

[CQI13]

Except most writers are pretty dumb (or petty).

For example, I don't believe DiMaggio was a first ballot HOFer. And many writers won't vote for someone to be first ballot BECAUSE "X player wasn't a first ballot HOFer." This was said by one of the voters in an interview last year. It's sort of like saying "Well, we made a mistake all these years ago...we'll keep making it!"

Also, the same applies to being a unanimous selection. Don't have the numbers on that, but I'm sure it's not that many. And again, as told by people who vote, there's a small group of voters that won't vote for someone (even if they deserve to go in or they normally would vote for them) simply so that they're not a unanimous selection.

[GatorBait19]

personally I don't think writers should vote for crap.

Who truly believes Peyton Manning was MVP this year???????? sure he had great numbers but Brees had better, but to me Brees wasnt either, i believe Favre was, with out Favre the vikes didnt make it nearly as far.

Writers should just not vote, period, awards, Hof anything

[The Final Countdown]

Originally Posted by GatorBait19

personally I don't think writers should vote for crap.

Who truly believes Peyton Manning was MVP this year???????? sure he had great numbers but Brees had better, but to me Brees wasnt either, i believe Favre was, with out Favre the vikes didnt make it nearly as far.

Writers should just not vote, period, awards, Hof anything

That is a ridiculous argument to make. Last year, the Vikings were a playoff team without Favre. Without Favre, they still would've been a good team. I doubt they'd have made the NFC title game, but they would have been competitive. Where would the Colts be without Peyton Manning?

I do think the writers can be biased at times, though. I'm at least partially with you on your first point. You just used what I think was a terrible example.

[GatorBait19]

Originally Posted by The Final Countdown

That is a ridiculous argument to make. Last year, the Vikings were a playoff team without Favre. Without Favre, they still would've been a good team. I doubt they'd have made the NFC title game, but they would have been competitive. Where would the Colts be without Peyton Manning?

I do think the writers can be biased at times, though. I'm at least partially with you on your first point. You just used what I think was a terrible example.

okay so with out Favre there are the second best team? I never said they weren't a playoff team, I said they didn't make it as far, they wouldn't have won there conference, plus Favre improved all his numbers, and made Sidney Rice look like the player we have been waiting for him to look at his first two years without a QB, playoff team with AP maybe, conference title game extremely doubtful so yes he was a huge huge huge peice of that team

i'm not saying Manning wasn't a good choice, i just believe Favre and Brees who both had better stats were the better choices

[PeterHilton]

Originally Posted by GatorBait19

i'm not saying Manning wasn't a good choice, i just believe Favre and Brees who both had better stats were the better choices

By saying Manning was a good or even viable choice, you're sort of defeating your argument that writers shouldn't be allowed to vote.

It's an opinion based award, just like the HOF.

Also, considering how awful the coaches polls can be in NCAA basketball and football, and how reticent to change the veteran's committees in all the HOFs have been, I'm not sure the solution is to give the decisions over to people 'in the business' as it were.

[GatorBait19]

Originally Posted by PeterHilton

By saying Manning was a good or even viable choice, you're sort of defeating your argument that writers shouldn't be allowed to vote.

It's an opinion based award, just like the HOF.

Also, considering how awful the coaches polls can be in NCAA basketball and football, and how reticent to change the veteran's committees in all the HOFs have been, I'm not sure the solution is to give the decisions over to people 'in the business' as it were.

How is defeating my argument? Jim Rice should have been a HOF a long time ago but because he had a bad relationship with the media it took him a long time to get into it.

Manning is loved by the media... that helped him, i never said it was a horrible choice.

My argument is that the writers don't look at every aspect, Favre made everyone else around him better, and last time I check MVP mean Most Valuable Player. Which mean person who does the most and helps out the most

Favre made Sidney Rice into a threat, Percy Harvin looked very good his first year catching the ball, and made the vikes TE look good

Who did Manning make look good? Dallas Clark and Reggie Wayne? They were good before this season.

[PeterHilton]

Originally Posted by GatorBait19

How is defeating my argument? Jim Rice should have been a HOF a long time ago but because he had a bad relationship with the media it took him a long time to get into it.

Manning is loved by the media... that helped him, i never said it was a horrible choice.

My argument is that the writers don't look at every aspect, Favre made everyone else around him better, and last time I check MVP mean Most Valuable Player. Which mean person who does the most and helps out the most

Favre made Sidney Rice into a threat, Percy Harvin looked very good his first year catching the ball, and made the vikes TE look good

Who did Manning make look good? Dallas Clark and Reggie Wayne? They were good before this season.

Anyone who wacthed the NFL in 09 saw a Colts team with no running game and a very average defense win 14 straight, including 7 by less than a TD. You said yourself,Manning wasn't a BAD choice.

That's why it defeats your argument. The writers didn't make some ridiculous or illogical or emotion based decision.

Therefore all you're really saying is that the writers shouldn't be allowed to vote because they don't agree with YOU.

Get over yourself.

[GatorBait19]

my god you are so right, look the had the 18 best defense in the NFL wow that is amazing........ wait what's this..... (scrolls over to ranking of ppg) they were 8th hardest team to score on.... better than the vikes and saints

wow i guess you proved it, he had a very average defense!

[PeterHilton]

Originally Posted by GatorBait19

my god you are so right, look the had the 18 best defense in the NFL wow that is amazing........ wait what's this..... (scrolls over to ranking of ppg) they were 8th hardest team to score on.... better than the vikes and saints

wow i guess you proved it, he had a very average defense!

You're still not getting it:

I never said I thought Manning was the right choice. That's not even the point.

You said that writers shouldn't be allowed to vote on the MVP (or anything, ever, actually ) based on the fact that they voted Peyton Manning the MVP.

Can you argue that others were more deserving? Obviously.

But the only way you could say that your argument actually holds up would be to somehow show that voting for Manning was so incredibly indefensible and unreasonable that it totally destroys their credibility. That voting for Payton Manning actually proves that the writers who voted for the award are completely incompetent.

So again...all you've really said in your last three posts is that all writers have zero credibility basically because they disagree with YOU.

Just because YOU don't agree with their votes does not automatically mean they don't know what they're talking about.

I'll take Peter King's opinion over GatorBait19 if it's all the same to you, ok?

[Remianen]

Originally Posted by GatorBait19

Who did Manning make look good? Dallas Clark and Reggie Wayne? They were good before this season.

This says it all.

Tell me GatorBait, are Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark (and Pierre and Austin) as good with Jim Sorgi? Do the Colts come from behind to win 7 games with Craig Painter? No? Then where is your argument coming from?

Lemme see if I can simplify this. With Favre, the Vikings went one game farther than they typically go. Now, do the Colts only lose one game's worth of advancement without Peyton? Hell no! I don't think anyone with a brain thinks the Colts win 12 games with Sorgi under center (FIVE, tops, with Painter).

In my mind, the only two MVP candidates this year are the two quarterbacks who played in the Super Bowl. The Saints don't make it nearly as far without Brees and neither do the Colts without Manning. After that, it becomes a case of determining how obvious the candidate's performance was to the team's success. If the Saints had had to come from behind to win more (instead of essentially smashing everyone they faced until the Cowboys game), Brees might've gotten more votes. But they didn't, so he didn't.

[GatorBait19]

Originally Posted by PeterHilton

You're still not getting it:

I never said I thought Manning was the right choice. That's not even the point.

You said that writers shouldn't be allowed to vote on the MVP (or anything, ever, actually ) based on the fact that they voted Peyton Manning the MVP.

Can you argue that others were more deserving? Obviously.

But the only way you could say that your argument actually holds up would be to somehow show that voting for Manning was so incredibly indefensible and unreasonable that it totally destroys their credibility. That voting for Payton Manning actually proves that the writers who voted for the award are completely incompetent.

So again...all you've really said in your last three posts is that all writers have zero credibility basically because they disagree with YOU.

Just because YOU don't agree with their votes does not automatically mean they don't know what they're talking about.

I'll take Peter King's opinion over GatorBait19 if it's all the same to you, ok?

That wasn't my arugment to start, you took it into just that. we were talking about someone going into the hall and you keep rolling with Manning, I even how long it took Jim Rice to get in

So here then, I will change my stance. let the writers vote for awards, but not for the Hall of Fame

[Imarevenant]

Originally Posted by GatorBait19

That wasn't my arugment to start, you took it into just that. we were talking about someone going into the hall and you keep rolling with Manning, I even how long it took Jim Rice to get in

So here then, I will change my stance. let the writers vote for awards, but not for the Hall of Fame

It actually was your argument, here:

Originally Posted by GatorBait19

personally I don't think writers should vote for crap.

Who truly believes Peyton Manning was MVP this year???????? sure he had great numbers but Brees had better, but to me Brees wasnt either, i believe Favre was, with out Favre the vikes didnt make it nearly as far.

Writers should just not vote, period, awards, Hof anything

You state that writers shouldn't vote for anything, give the specific example that Manning shouldn't have won MVP as a reason why writers shouldn't vote for anything, and then reiterate your opinion.

Pretty clear you were using Manning winning MVP as a basis, for why writers shouldn't vote on awards.

Sorry, not trying to jump on you, just trying to show you why Peter did.

Personally I think you severely underestimate what Manning means to that team, and may not have the background about just how complex the Colts offense is.

It's not a basic offense where receivers just run routes and Peyton throws them the ball. Receivers in this offense are required to read what is happening during the play and adjust their route accordingly. Hell I believe they only have a handful of real passing plays, they are just able to give different looks because of the receivers adjustments. This is also why, Austin Collie coming in and being so successful as a rookie is a big deal, this is a difficult offense for WR's to pick up.

Anyway, in this offense Manning, has to read the defense before the snap and make adjustments and know his receivers well enough that he'll know the type of adjustment they are making in any given situation. This offense isn't a situation where if Peyton goes down, Cassel can come in and win 11 games; if Peyton goes down that team is screwed.

[BHK1978]

Not sure if many people know this or not but the Yankees have a pitcher named Pat Venditte who is ambidextrous. The Professional Baseball Umpires Corporation had to make a rule just for him, where he has to visually signal both the batter and the umpire as to which arm he is going to use during that at bat. And he can not change which arm he throws with during said at bat.

I had heard about him before but had never heard about the rule that they made for him. I found it interesting.

[Slagaholic]

There's a hilarious video of him and a switch hitter going back and forth and back and forth for minutes.