- Posts: 569
- Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 3:53 pm
Valen wrote:I've always felt sportswriters award bonus points in their estimation of players if they've been loyal to one team their entire careers like Ripken and Gwynn were.
The thought occurs to me it could be coincidence. Players in general since the advent of free agency have been less and less likely to spend entire careers with one team. So modern era players are less likely to fit mold of played for only one team. And there appears to be a bias against modern players as a consequence of the steroid era. So while it may be a true statement the root cause could be in doubt. It could be the era that has reduced number of players getting voted in as the root cause with the loyalty issue being a side effect.
Otherwise I would think that playing for multiple teams would get you exposed up close to more writers and help build support for your candidacy.
49 players have been added since 2000, why is this a low number? (average of 3 per year added to the hall of fame and more than 20% of the members in 20% of the years, Are you looking for more to get in, with another 16 years who are the 49 present players that you think will get in and what are the underserving souls other than the 49 you would add in the next 16 years that won’t get in? That means nearly 7 percent of the current players playing the game will make the Hall of Fame. Perhaps if they double it they can change the name to Baseball Hall of the Pretty Good.