Hall of Fame vote editorial of sorts.

Maddux and Glavine, no brainers

Frank Thomas -- great choice. When I was with the Hall of Fame, I drove him back to his hotel after he was done with his stint in the (then annual) Hall of Fame game. (He took up a great deal of the van’s passenger area). He said it was too bad they were discontinuing the game, because he loved coming to Cooperstown. I remarked that he would probably be coming back to be inducted some day, and he said it would be a great honor, but he was afraid that not being willing to give someone an interview might cost him that chance.

Fortunately for the Hall, it didn’t, but that is a telling statement, and another (among many) good reason for revamping the process and taking it out of the hands of a select group of sportswriters, among them a minority who think the election is about the statements, real or metaphorical, that they have to make, rather than about whether or not the player’s career is of sufficient substance to merit inclusion.

Do not mistake this as advocacy for inclusion of proven steroid users and those who have lied about such things from the pompous perch arrogance provides.

Never knew much about "The Big Hurt" but was it just one media person or a select few or the whole gamut of media that he refused to interview with?

Steve Carlton was the same way.

Biggio 2 votes short. Piazza pretty close -probably New York voters who turn a blind eye to his roids and one dimensional play.

Never knew much about "The Big Hurt" but was it just one media person or a select few or the whole gamut of media that he refused to interview with?

My take on it was that he was less tolerant of reporters who asked the "asked and answered" type of question rather than those that had legitimate substance...thing like "How angry were you after you struck out for the fourth time?"
Interviewers like to be treated like they are smarter than the interviewee, and that's not always the case.

When I think about Frank Thomas, the game where he hit his 500th HR comes to mind. He hit it early, like the 2nd inning. Later in the game he was called out looking, and in the ensuing argument was thrown out of the game. Sportscenter was all over this, "How do you get thrown out of the game you hit your 500th HR in?"

But getting the details right mattered to Thomas. Sometimes his passion for the game itself got in the way of the majesty and PR that the business of baseball demands. With all the fuss about who is not going into the HOF, the three that are going in seem very deserving.

The level of b*tching by the sports writers makes me want to puke... "Help me! I don't know how to handle the steroid era! We need to redo the system! I can only vote for 10 players! I need more!"

My response:
1. If you don't know how to vote, then pull a LeBetard and give it to somebody else. I'd be happy to do it for you.
2. Just because you think the roiders should get in doesn't mean that the system needs to be torn down and redone. Also, listen to the veterans committee. They aren't exactly licking their chops to vote these guys in either.
3. If you think 10 slots is too few, you need to think about what the HOF means and possibly give up your ballot.
4. If you are worried about guys dropping off the ballot then use one of your slots on him. I don't think Greg Maddux cares if he gets 96% of the vote instead of 97%.

The voters have spoken and the roiders are not getting in. Complaining about it is the same as complaining about Bush or Obama getting re-elected. All you can do is keep voting.