View Single Post
Old
01-13-2014, 01:45 PM
  #861
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,685
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest View Post
Peak first and foremost. If you were never considered great, or one of the best players in the league, or best at you're position than I think its a no go right from the start.

Like Hiesenberg said before, the only guys like that that are going to be in the discussion are players that played for a really long time, and have nice totals simply because they played a lot of games.

So first I'd put the numbers that they put up in their best 5-7 years.

Next I'd say career rate statistics because again they eliminate the problem with totals being skewed by games played.

After that I'd go to career totals because you still have to have done it for some length of time.

At the bottom would be any type of awards or feats or records. All of that stuff is derivative of the numbers, and in some cases decided by voting, so it's secondary to the statistics.
The peak years thing being the top doesn't jive with me. I understand the reason that some people vote that way, but I'm a bottom line guy. A guy who hits 3,000 hits over 20 years is more deserving of the hall than a guy tho hits 2,000 hits in 10 years.

I'm really of the opinion that if there is a debate about whether a player is in the hall or not, he probably shouldn't be in the hall. I'd rather block entry for a handful of players that really should in there than let in one who shouldn't. Like I've said in the past, there are guys in the HOF that I would not have voted for, and there is no right or wrong way to vote, but IMO, the Hall is for the best of the best of all time. Nothing less.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline