Ortiz 500 HR = HOF?

It's called the BASEBALL hall of fame not the BASEBALL HITTER/FIELDER AND PITCHER hall of fame. Last time I checked the DH was part of the game. The voters don't really consider pitchers batting statistics or fielding as criteria so why should the fact DH's don't play the field be held against them. If they are one of the best hitters of their era, they deserve to be in, at least in this fans opinion. Of course I don't vote. YMMV.

Yes it's called the baseball Hall of Fame, and part of playing baseball, if you're a position player, is playing defense. Designated hitters completely eschew participation in that part, and are, thus, part-time/incomplete players...and part-time incomplete players have no place in the Hall of Fame.

And your comparison to pitchers' hitting and fielding is both a specious and an inapt one. Pitchers' haven't been judged on their hitting or fielding for almost a century. Baseball people and writers correctly see their production there as a bonus to what they accomplish on the mound, not 1/2 of their expected game or even close to it. So, it is not an apt comparison. An outstanding pitcher who doesn't hit or field particularly well is still a complete and outstanding pitcher. A DH who spends most of his time in the dugout without playing defense is not a complete player.

So, excellent full-time DH's deserve the accolades they receive for their excellent hitting, but, as part-time/incomplete players without a position, they don't deserve a place in the HOF.

It's called the BASEBALL hall of fame not the BASEBALL HITTER/FIELDER AND PITCHER hall of fame. Last time I checked the DH was part of the game. The voters don't really consider pitchers batting statistics or fielding as criteria so why should the fact DH's don't play the field be held against them. If they are one of the best hitters of their era, they deserve to be in, at least in this fans opinion. Of course I don't vote. YMMV.

Yes it's called the baseball Hall of Fame, and part of playing baseball, if you're a position player, is playing defense. Designated hitters completely eschew participation in that part, and are, thus, part-time/incomplete players...and part-time incomplete players have no place in the Hall of Fame.

And your comparison to pitchers' hitting and fielding is both a specious and an inapt one. Pitchers' haven't been judged on their hitting or fielding for almost a century. Baseball people and writers correctly see their production there as a bonus to what they accomplish on the mound, not 1/2 of their expected game or even close to it. So, it is not an apt comparison. An outstanding pitcher who doesn't hit or field particularly well is still a complete and outstanding pitcher. A DH who spends most of his time in the dugout without playing defense is not a complete player.

So, excellent full-time DH's deserve the accolades they receive for their excellent hitting, but, as part-time/incomplete players without a position, they don't deserve a place in the HOF.

In your opinion.

In mine they do.

Neither of us is a voter (at least I'm not) so it's all just hot air anyway.

David Ortiz a Hall of Famer? Big Popout a Hall of Famer? I do not see that at all. He is a nice two tool player.

Is Rafael Palmeiro in the Hall of Fame?

In your opinion.

In mine they do.

No, I showed pretty well why and how it's more than just my opinion.

Now, my thinking Lana Del Rey is the best singer of this decade is just my opinion, although many other wise ones agree...

Is Rafael Palmeiro in the Hall of Fame?

Bigger PED issues for Raffy. But I'd say Edgar Martinez should be.

In your opinion.

In mine they do.

No, I showed pretty well why and how it's more than just my opinion.

Now, my thinking Lana Del Rey is the best singer of this decade is just my opinion, although many other wise ones agree...

How silly of me. Of course you win.

No, of course I was right...but you're close.

No, of course I was right...but you're close.

SIGH Whatever floats your boat. As I stated its my opinion. I'm clearly as entitled to my opinion as you are to yours.
I answered what I perceived was the original posters question(s).
I have no desire to be in a debate with you because you are always right and you always win. Please just don't respond to my posts unless I specially address you or yours. We'll both be happier that way, no wait. Only I'll be happier that way.

Considering how flustered you've gotten, I think it's your boat that' needs floating...

And as I stated in my post above, I well showed my argument is not just a matter of "opinion." If you can't counter what I wrote, that's fine. As to your childish "you always win" fluff, my asserting and defending my position doesn't constitute that at all...it's just what you always sadly resort to when you can't make your argument. You also seem to forget you never admit you're wrong, yourself. I'm not surprised that irony eludes you.

Anyway, you responded to my stance on Ortiz; I didn't engage you. Considering how flustered you get every time you try to engage my arguments, I will be extremely happy if you stop doing so...