Ortiz 500 HR = HOF?

To add to LM's comments on DH's, how does any starting pitcher get into the HOF when they play in approximately 25% of the teams games each season. Nothing the in rule book stating that they cannot pitch everyday like most hitters who are in the HOF who play in a majority of the teams games each season. Should we treat starting pitchers like bench or utilty players who may play the equilvalent of 30-40 games a year? Doubt there is even 1 player in the HOF that would meet that criteria.

As long as the position of DH is in the baseball rule book then those players should not be biased against. If not for the DH position Frank Thomas would not have had as good of numbers as he ended up with as he was primarily a DH for many years.

Edgar Martinez and David Ortiz are two of the best all-time DH's and should be be in or out of the HOF based on their batting stats without penalty for not playing defense.

Hit the ball right on the screws here LM, that's exactly how I feel about the issue too.

Nicely said. That is the point I was trying to make. The game(and the rules) changes, the HOF standards have to change with the game. Eagles NFL HOF'er Chuck Bednaric thought anybody that did not play both ways was a pussy and did not belong in the NFL HOF. His point is just as valid as Stether's desire to exclude the DH from the HOF for not playing in the field. The game has changed and old standards used to judge performance must change as the game changes. The best of the best of the DH's should get into the HOF, and Ortiz is one of the best of the best.

Eagles NFL HOF'er Chuck Bednaric thought anybody that did not play both ways was a ....

Anyone else waiting for 5000 words on how balls don't have screws????

Back to the topic - durantjerry, great point, the Bednaric reference is a terrific perspective.

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

Here is where strether's argument falls very flat. He claims wrongly that Ortiz should not be in because he doesn't play defense and you have to do both in his eyes in order to get in the HOF. Tell me then......How could any pitcher who played most or all of his career in the AL ever get in the HOF? They weren't a complete player because they hardly batted. You could say that pitchers are different because they are only judged on their pitching. How is the reverse not true for a player that was primarily a DH then? You can't have it both ways.

As long as the position of DH is in the baseball rule book then those players should not be biased against. If not for the DH position Frank Thomas would not have had as good of numbers as he ended up with as he was primarily a DH for many years.

Edgar Martinez and David Ortiz are two of the best all-time DH's and should be be in or out of the HOF based on their batting stats without penalty for not playing defense.

Actually, Bombers, I well-supported my argument; your unsupported ones fell flat from the get-go. I logically and soundly argued ortiz doesn't deserve to be in the HOF because he doesn't play defense, and you completely failed to counter it, particularly since your arguments against it also "fell flat."

As I already pointed out, but you failed to counter:

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.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.

That's why pitchers who don't hit or pitch very well make the HOF. They're not judged as pitchers on their fielding or hitting abilities. Hitters who don't play the field are definitely eschewing part of the game non-pitching players are judged by: defense. So, it's not a matter of my having it both ways. It's a matter of you and Niners making an inapt comparison that fails to support your erroneous argument.

And your argument about DH's being in the rule book is even worse. Pure pinch runners like Herb Washington and primary defensive replacements like McDonald are allowed, too. That doesn't mean keeping them out of the HOF is "bias," it's just sound judgment. And Thomas played more than enough games at 1b to show he could be a complete player, unlike Martinez and Ortiz...so that argument falls flat as well.

Feel free to try again.

Nicely said. That is the point I was trying to make. The game(and the rules) changes, the HOF standards have to change with the game. Eagles NFL HOF'er Chuck Bednaric thought anybody that did not play both ways was a pussy and did not belong in the NFL HOF. His point is just as valid as Stether's desire to exclude the DH from the HOF for not playing in the field. The game has changed and old standards used to judge performance must change as the game changes. The best of the best of the DH's should get into the HOF, and Ortiz is one of the best of the best.

I already showed above why Bombers argument was neither nicely said nor logical.

As to the Bednaric comparison, it's another of your specious, inapt football comparisons. Firstly, as I said before, baseball and football are entirely different games. There are hardly any parallels between them, as there are between Rugby and Australian Rules Football. So, there is no true football equivalent to the DH who could justify a full-time DH's inclusion in the HOF

Secondly, there is no recent parallel to the shift on two-way players in baseball as there has been recently in football. In football, most players play only offense or only defense; only the rare few play both. In baseball, almost all non-pitching/hitting players still play both offense and defense. So, the DH still stands out as a part time player--as opposed to a NFL player who only plays offense or defense--who doesn't play an important part of the non-pitching player's game, spends most of his time on the dugout while other non-pitching players play defense, and--as many BB writers agree--doesn't merit a place in the HOF.

So, the game hasn't changed as much as you claim, most non-pitching players--unlike NFL players--play offense and defense, so the HOF non-pitching player should be one who played both as well. So, no, the best of the best full-time DH's shouldn't make the HOF, and Ortiz shouldn't as well.

And your argument about DH's being in the rule book is even worse. Pure pinch runners like Herb Washington and primary defensive replacements like McDonald are allowed, too. That doesn't mean keeping them out of the HOF is "bias," it's just sound judgment. And Thomas played more than enough games at 1b to show he could be a complete player, unlike Martinez and Ortiz...so that argument falls flat as well.

I agree that all the pitcher based arguments are weak, but comparing Herb Washington and John McDonald's exclusion from the Baseball HOF to David Ortiz and Edgar Martinez being excluded from the HOF is beyond ludicrous. From the Rodney Dangerfield "We don't get no respect" files, the Award for the best DH is named after Edgar Martinez. I submit to my fellow supporters that this makes keeping Edgar Martinez out of the HOF the equivelant of keeping the other award namesakes such as Cy Young and Hank Aaron out of the hall. What ex-players have awards named after them? As far as I can tell it's Cy Young, Hank Aaron, Roberto Clemente and Edgar Martinez! Nuff Said!

And your argument about DH's being in the rule book is even worse. Pure pinch runners like Herb Washington and primary defensive replacements like McDonald are allowed, too. That doesn't mean keeping them out of the HOF is "bias," it's just sound judgment. And Thomas played more than enough games at 1b to show he could be a complete player, unlike Martinez and Ortiz...so that argument falls flat as well.

I agree that all the pitcher based arguments are weak, but comparing Herb Washington and John McDonald's exclusion from the Baseball HOF to David Ortiz and Edgar Martinez being excluded from the HOF is beyond ludicrous. From the Rodney Dangerfield "We don't get no respect" files, the Award for the best DH is named after Edgar Martinez. I submit to my fellow supporters that this makes keeping Edgar Martinez out of the HOF the equivelant of keeping the other award namesakes such as Cy Young and Hank Aaron out of the hall. What ex-players have awards named after them? As far as I can tell it's Cy Young, Hank Aaron, Roberto Clemente and Edgar Martinez! Nuff Said!

At least we agree the pitcher comparisons are weak. And, no, my argument wasn't ludicrous, but your saying so certainly is. The argument was that if a position is allowed by the rule book, those players playing them should be allowed in the HOF by that fact only. If that were true, then pinch runners like Washington and defensive replacements like McDonald would have to merit inclusion as well. If you can't see that, then you don't grasp basic syllogistic logic.

And if you're going to argue having an award named after you merits inclusion to the HOF, you truly don't understand it. The HOF is for the best MLB baseball players, not the sources of eponymous awards. Cy Young and Hank Aaron are in the HOF because they earned it with their play, not because an award was named after them. Nuff said...

Full time DHs have more impact on team wins over the course of a season than modern closers do, even great ones.

This was a topic on MLB network this morning, and all four panel members said that Ortiz should be in, Edgar too. I'll take the opinions of these four guys over Dick Stretcher any day of the week.

This was a topic on MLB network this morning, and all four panel members said that Ortiz should be in, Edgar too. I'll take the opinions of these four guys over Dick Stretcher any day of the week.

Ditto as I said earlier all his pontificating, no matter how well supported amounts to nothing more than hot air and his opinion which is as valid as anyone else's. The voters will decide in the end.