Harold Baines! ... H.O.F.!

[StanMarsh51]

So wait...Longevity is a detriment to fame? That's news to me. You're gonna slice it how you like. Good for you. But, in the end, a veterans committee of long-time baseball people that know a sh*t ton more about baseball than you and I see it my way...unless you're trying to make the argument that they put Harold Baines in for publicity and not merit...which makes absolutely no sense considering the dude is one of the most soft-spoken athletes of all-time.

Haters gonna hate. Step on ye of little consequence. Harold is in the hall forevermore.

So you agree that Baines was never really a great player? You're just bringing up that he had longevity, but making no mentioning of any great seasons/runs he had, correct?

And that wasn't even the Veterans Committee that voted him in....it's the Today's Era Committe, a small panel of just 16, some of whom are probably friends/acquaintances with Baines (Roberto Alomar, Joe Torre, Joe Morgan, Ozzie Smith, Tony LaRusa are some of the guys on that committee). This is the same group that voted in Jack Morris (a guy with a near 4 ERA into the hall).

 

[Jiddy]

So you agree that Baines was never really a great player? You're just bringing up that he had longevity, but making no mentioning of any great seasons/runs he had, correct?

And that wasn't even the Veterans Committee that voted him in....it's the Today's Era Committe, a small panel of just 16, some of whom are probably friends/acquaintances with Baines (Roberto Alomar, Joe Torre, Joe Morgan, Ozzie Smith, Tony LaRusa are some of the guys on that committee). This is the same group that voted in Jack Morris (a guy with a near 4 ERA into the hall).

I can play this game too...

"So you agree that this Veterans/Today's Era/whogivesash*ttheexactname committee knows about 1 billion times more than you about baseball? Good...Then we all agree they're right." Aaaaannnnnddd....We're done here.

 

[StanMarsh51]

I can play this game too...

"So you agree that this Veterans/Today's Era/whogivesash*ttheexactname committee knows about 1 billion times more than you about baseball? Good...Then we all agree they're right." Aaaaannnnnddd....We're done here.

The point's going over your head... You're fooling yourself if you think they're being 100% objective. Similar to gold gloves - how many times is there a gold glove winner that had no business winning ( and gold gloves are voted on by the players and managers).

You don't think there's any possibility of bias towards friends/acquaintances?


And you're still ignoring the main question- how many great seasons did Baines have? You keep avoiding this question which leads me to believe that you're having a hard time finding them.

 

[idseer]

you know a player doesn't have a good argument when fans discount stats and say "he was the heart and soul" of the team. lmao

what does some idiot boston fan care anyway? go jerk off somewhere else.

 

[idseer]

The point's going over your head... You're fooling yourself if you think they're being 100% objective. Similar to gold gloves - how many times is there a gold glove winner that had no business winning ( and gold gloves are voted on by the players and managers).

You don't think there's any possibility of bias towards friends/acquaintances?


And you're still ignoring the main question- how many great seasons did Baines have? You keep avoiding this question which leads me to believe that you're having a hard time finding them.

your argument is full of shit STANLEY. having a mind-blowing season or three does not make a great player. being consistently one of the better players in the game every year does! when it all shakes out, baines' numbers are in fact hall-worthy.

 

[idseer]

The fact he got in before Edgar is ridiculous...

he didn't get in before edgar. baines got in in his 18th year after retirement. edgar is only in his 15th year.

Martinez said. “He was a great hitter for many years. He deserves to be in the Hall of Fame."

you see, ballplayers know what a good baseball player is. the likes of numbskulls like stanmarsh51, navamind and you DON'T!

 

[StanMarsh51]

your argument is full of shit STANLEY. having a mind-blowing season or three does not make a great player. being consistently one of the better players in the game every year does! when it all shakes out, baines' numbers are in fact hall-worthy.

So players can be great without having a single great season?




Is Robin Ventura in your hall of fame? Magglio Ordonez? Mark Buehrle? Let's just put every ChiSox great in there...

 

[idseer]

i think this article lays out a decent case for harold. this is not to say other players of similar quality aren't as qualified. but what kind of baby cries about harold being inducted only because their own favorites aren't? you can say so and so also deserves it, but don't drag harold down just because circumstances got him in. just makes you look like a butt-hurt child.

Did labor strife cost Harold Baines the Hall of Fame? – Baseball Egg

 

[StanMarsh51]

i think this article lays out a decent case for harold. this is not to say other players of similar quality aren't as qualified. but what kind of baby cries about harold being inducted only because their own favorites aren't? you can say so and so also deserves it, but don't drag harold down just because circumstances got him in. just makes you look like a butt-hurt child.

Did labor strife cost Harold Baines the Hall of Fame? – Baseball Egg

The whole merit of that article is that he could've gotten 3,000 hits, but nowhere does it say he had a hall worthy career. At the same time, he probably would've been the worst player to get 3,000.

If Biggio couldn't get in first ballot with 3,000 and he was a much better player , how long would it have taken Baines to get in had he gotten 3,000?

 

[idseer]

So players can be great without having a single great season?




Is Robin Ventura in your hall of fame? Magglio Ordonez? Mark Buehrle? Let's just put every ChiSox great in there...

your vision it strikingly narrow. it's only your interpretation that a great player must have among the best seasons in at least a few years. where is this written? if i'm putting together a team of players and i already know their lifetime careers and my choice is between ralph kiner and harold baines ..... i'd take harold every time! ralph had some great seasons. but harold had a better career. he had a more profound effect on my team. kiner will only provide me with 1015 rbi's. baines with 1628. kiner played on a team that never finished higher than 4th place ... so what good were those 'great' seasons?

baines was a 6 time all star and in three other years didn't make the a.s. game but garnered mvp votes meaning essentially he finished those years very strong.

 

[StanMarsh51]

your vision it strikingly narrow. it's only your interpretation that a great player must have among the best seasons in at least a few years. where is this written? if i'm putting together a team of players and i already know their lifetime careers and my choice is between ralph kiner and harold baines ..... i'd take harold every time! ralph had some great seasons. but harold had a better career. he had a more profound effect on my team. kiner will only provide me with 1015 rbi's. baines with 1628. kiner played on a team that never finished higher than 4th place ... so what good were those 'great' seasons?

baines was a 6 time all star and in three other years didn't make the a.s. game but garnered mvp votes meaning essentially he finished those years very strong.

Your ignorance is showing... many times did Kiner finish top 10 in RBI, and compare that to how many times Baines did. Baines finished top 10 in the AL in RBI just two times, while Liner did so 8...

They played in 2 different eras. Getting 100 RBI was less common in Kiner's day.

Shoot, Mickey Mantle only had 4 seasons with 100 RBI, while Magglio Ordonez had 7._different run scoring eras. Was Magglio a better RBI guy than Mantle, or did he just play in a bigger run scoring era?

Magglio > Mantle

 

[idseer]

The whole merit of that article is that he could've gotten 3,000 hits, but nowhere does it say he had a hall worthy career. At the same time, he probably would've been the worst player to get 3,000.

If Biggio couldn't get in first ballot with 3,000 and he was a much better player , how long would it have taken Baines to get in had he gotten 3,000?

nobody really knows what "hall-worthy" means. it's apparent you knew nothing about baines. he is just a name of a player on a team you didn't follow or like. in the end, what you think is meaningless. you refuse any education on the matter so why waste anymore time on the likes of you assholes who come here to tell us why he wasn't very good.

this conversation is adjourned.

 

[idseer]

Your ignorance is showing... many times did Kiner finish top 10 in RBI, and compare that to how many times Baines did. Baines finished top 10 in the AL in RBI just two times, while Liner did so 8...

They played in 2 different eras. Getting 100 RBI was less common in Kiner's day.

Shoot, Mickey Mantle only had 4 seasons with 100 RBI, while Magglio Ordonez had 7._different run scoring eras. Was Magglio a better RBI guy than Mantle, or did he just play in a bigger run scoring era?

Magglio > Mantle

since this showed up late i will answer .... for the last time. it's actually your own ignorance showing. in kiner's time there were far more 100 rbi batter than in baines time (and this is with far fewer teams!). you really should check your facts before making yourself look like a fool. in 1950 alone there were 22 100 rbi guys. kiner ranked 8th.
in 1985 (baines 113) harold ranked 5th of 16.

i guess what i am saying is .... go away! i hate arguing with someone who doesn't know any facts but feels free to throw them around anyway.

 

[StanMarsh51]

since this showed up late i will answer .... for the last time. it's actually your own ignorance showing. in kiner's time there were far more 100 rbi batter than in baines time (and this is with far fewer teams!). you really should check your facts before making yourself look like a fool. in 1950 alone there were 22 100 rbi guys. kiner ranked 8th.
in 1985 (baines 113) harold ranked 5th of 16.

i guess what i am saying is .... go away! i hate arguing with someone who doesn't know any facts but feels free to throw them around anyway.

Nice cherry pick... Why didn't you use a year like 1996 or 1997 or 1998, when 40+ players each year had 100 RBI? Is 100 RBI that special when 40+ guys reached it?

What years during Kalines's career did 40 guys get 100 RBI?

 

[Nosferatu]

he didn't get in before edgar. baines got in in his 18th year after retirement. edgar is only in his 15th year.

Martinez said. “He was a great hitter for many years. He deserves to be in the Hall of Fame."

you see, ballplayers know what a good baseball player is. the likes of numbskulls like stanmarsh51, navamind and you DON'T!

Who cares what Martinez said, what do you expect him to say, Baines sucked it should have been me???

You are a clown, we get it you're a homer but Baines should not be a hall of famer period!

Never lead the league in anything, never even hit 30 hr's didn't make 3,000 hits, never won a batting title, best he ever did in MVP voting is 9th. It's not the hall of pretty decent player who played for 20+ years.

Also, I never said he wasn't a good baseball player, what I am saying is he was never great and he is not a hall of fame player...

 

[idseer]

Nice cherry pick... Why didn't you use a year like 1996 or 1997 or 1998, when 40+ players each year had 100 RBI? Is 100 RBI that special when 40+ guys reached it?

What years during Kalines's career did 40 guys get 100 RBI?

in 1953 21 players had 100 rbi's the equivalent of 40 with 30 teams.
1954 - 17
1955 - 17
1962 - 18

i'm not going to go thru all of them.
your bullshit just doesn't work.
and btw, kaline only had 3 100 rbi years .... same as harold.

i know you'll keep responding and coming up with more things pulled from your ass. so i'm thru. for good this time.
go ahead and feel free to pull some more.

 

[idseer]

Who cares what Martinez said, what do you expect him to say, Baines sucked it should have been me???

so your response is he didn't mean it? well .... my response is you're a know-nothing asshole.

 

[Nosferatu]

so your response is he didn't mean it? well .... my response is you're a know-nothing asshole.

Learn to read...

 

[StanMarsh51]

in 1953 21 players had 100 rbi's the equivalent of 40 with 30 teams.
1954 - 17
1955 - 17
1962 - 18

i'm not going to go thru all of them.
your bullshit just doesn't work.
and btw, kaline only had 3 100 rbi years .... same as harold.

i know you'll keep responding and coming up with more things pulled from your ass. so i'm thru. for good this time.
go ahead and feel free to pull some more.

Baines didn't play in a 30 team league until 1998....

In 1996, there were 50 players with 100 RBI in a 28 league team (1.79 per team). What year during Kaline or Kiner's career had 1.79 100 RBI guys per team?

In 1968 when Kaline played, just 3 players in baseball had 100 RBI with 20 teams....when was it like that with Baines? Or 1967 with just 7 players with 100 RBI?

 

[idseer]

In 1968 when Kaline played, just 3 players in baseball had 100 RBI

and kaline had just 52. your point about rbi's is nonsensical. you have no point. some years rbi's were up and some years they were down. and it has always been thus. balls change, fields change, pitching mounds change. you ask a question or state a fact you pull out of your ass and i answer. all you do is sidestep and (dare i say it)?) cherry pick!

baines had a great career and has nothing to apologize for. the baseball people who selected him did so for a reason (he didn't have 12 good buddies on that list). you never watched or followed baines and so you're baffled to the point of trying to bring sox fans down by belittling him simply because your little mind can 't abide it. well .... fuck you!