BHK1978 Posted February 22, 2010 Author Share Posted February 22, 2010 Jeter is a first ballot Hall of Famer. Anyone who says different is a moron. I'd have to think about my team a little more. One thing I will say is home runs aren't going to be a focus of mine. I prefer speed over the long ball every day of the week. A team of burners would ALWAYS have RISP, you wouldn't need home runs when the team is running laps around the bases and chasing the pitcher(s) out of the game (pitch counts ftw!). So as much as I love the Splendid Splinter, Rickey Henderson's my left fielder (Williams would be DH). In school, people always thought I wore 33 because of Canseco. Wrong. Add 24 and 9 and see what you get. Besides those two, I'll have to think about it a bit more. I thought about Rickey as well, but Teddy Ballgame is just a better hitter. So you are probably going for a more National League style team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 To me Ricky and Jeter are both first ballot with out a doubt. Jeter is the best SS ever in Yankee history and has been a leader his whole time there, Henderson set records that were never meant to be set by a lead-off hitter here is a better question..... does anyone believe Nomar is a hall of famer? injuries messed his whole career up, so I honestly say no, not when you have people like Jeter and A-Rod who were always considered better SS then you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted February 23, 2010 Author Share Posted February 23, 2010 To me Ricky and Jeter are both first ballot with out a doubt. Jeter is the best SS ever in Yankee history and has been a leader his whole time there, Henderson set records that were never meant to be set by a lead-off hitter here is a better question..... does anyone believe Nomar is a hall of famer? injuries messed his whole career up, so I honestly say no, not when you have people like Jeter and A-Rod who were always considered better SS then you Sorry should have made that clear Ricky is already in the HOF. I was talking about how I was thinking about putting him on my team. As for Nomar, that is a tough one. Like you said injuries really destroyed a great career. I really can not see him getting into the hall because the stats are just not there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Final Countdown Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 here is a better question..... does anyone believe Nomar is a hall of famer? injuries messed his whole career up, so I honestly say no, not when you have people like Jeter and A-Rod who were always considered better SS then you 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted February 23, 2010 Author Share Posted February 23, 2010 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. I couldn't have said it any better (No honestly I really could not have said it any better, you've seen all of the typos in my posts.)! The thing is sometimes player who are not hall of famers get in. For instance, in my opinion Phil Rizzuto does not belong in the HOF as a player. Maybe as a broadcaster but not as a player. And yet he made it into the Hall of Fame via the Veterans Committee. Like Final Countdown said, had his stats changed over the thirty years from when he retired to when he was elected into the Hall of Fame? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remianen Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CQI13 Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Final Countdown Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 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! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remianen Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="PeterHilton" data-cite="PeterHilton" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>You're still not getting it:<p> </p><p> I never said I thought Manning was the right choice. That's not even the point.</p><p> </p><p> You said that writers shouldn't be allowed to vote on the MVP (or anything, ever, actually ) <strong>based on the fact that they voted Peyton Manning the MVP.</strong></p><p> </p><p> Can you argue that others were more deserving? Obviously. </p><p> </p><p> 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.</p><p> </p><p> 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. </p><p> </p><p> Just because YOU don't agree with their votes does not automatically mean they don't know what they're talking about. </p><p> </p><p> I'll take Peter King's opinion over GatorBait19 if it's all the same to you, ok?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> 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</p><p> </p><p> So here then, I will change my stance. let the writers vote for awards, but not for the Hall of Fame</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imarevenant Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="GatorBait19" data-cite="GatorBait19" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><strong>That wasn't my arugment to start, you took it into just that.</strong> 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<p> </p><p> So here then, I will change my stance. let the writers vote for awards, but not for the Hall of Fame</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It actually was your argument, here:</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="GatorBait19" data-cite="GatorBait19" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>personally I don't think writers should vote for crap.<p> </p><p> 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.</p><p> </p><p> Writers should just not vote, period, awards, Hof anything</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> 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. </p><p> </p><p> Pretty clear you were using Manning winning MVP as a basis, for why writers shouldn't vote on awards.</p><p> </p><p> Sorry, not trying to jump on you, just trying to show you why Peter did.</p><p> </p><p> 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. </p><p> </p><p> 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.</p><p> </p><p> Anyway, in this offense Manning, has to read the defense before the snap and make adjustments <span style="text-decoration:underline;">and</span> 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.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted March 31, 2010 Author Share Posted March 31, 2010 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slagaholic Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 There's a hilarious video of him and a switch hitter going back and forth and back and forth for minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CQI13 Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 I remember there was a HS pitcher in my hometown years ago that fit that description of being a switch pitcher. That was awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthsiddus2 Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 Pat's an attraction no doubt. I do see potential from him in a reliever role. That's about it. I haven't seen enough of him yet to make a proper decision though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jesterx7769 Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 I havent gotten into this thread before but since I couldnt find the old SI (pretty sure my gf threw them out despite saying im not looking in the right box) What happened to the High School catcher phenom kid that was challenging the rules? Have they made a decision? I haven't heard any follow up. I was thinking about how my Tigers have gone down hill and how a hot young catcher could help long term so thats how I came about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slagaholic Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 Bryce Harper who you're talking about? He dropped out of HS, got his GED and is currently hitting around .400 for the College of Southern Nevada. Soo..he's prolly the #1 pick in June. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jesterx7769 Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 Yeah thats who, I googled him once you mentioned his name. I knew he dropped out of HS for his GED but I didn't know he was in college and was going to be eligible. Seems like Nats are gonna have the best Pitching and Catching prospect in a long term, too bad they still will suck and just trade them in a few years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.